ftp.pwg.org€¦ · Web view11/2/2015 · The Printer Working Group (or PWG) is a Program of the IEEE Industry Standards and Technology Organization (ISTO) with member organizations

The Printer Working Group

May 23, 2023Working Draft

IPP Implementor's Guide v2.0 (IG)(Updates RFC 3196)

Status: Stable

Abstract: This document updates and extends "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Implementor’s Guide" (RFC 3196) for all IPP protocol versions.

This document is a PWG Working Draft. For a definition of a "PWG Working Draft", see: http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/general/pwg-process30.pdf

This document is available electronically at:

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippig20-20150211.pdf

Copyright © 2014 The Printer Working Group. All rights reserved.

123456789

1011

12

13

14

15

1617

1819

20

21

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippig20-20150211.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/general/pwg-process30.pdf

Working Draft – IPP Implementor's Guide v2.0 (IG) May 23, 2023

Copyright © 2015 The Printer Working Group. All rights reserved.

This document may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on, or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice, this paragraph and the title of the Document as referenced below are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the IEEE-ISTO and the Printer Working Group, a program of the IEEE-ISTO.

Title: IPP Implementor's Guide v2.0 (IG)

The IEEE-ISTO and the Printer Working Group DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED INCLUDING (WITHOUT LIMITATION) ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

The Printer Working Group, a program of the IEEE-ISTO, reserves the right to make changes to the document without further notice. The document may be updated, replaced or made obsolete by other documents at any time.

The IEEE-ISTO takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights.

The IEEE-ISTO invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents, or patent applications, or other proprietary rights which may cover technology that may be required to implement the contents of this document. The IEEE-ISTO and its programs shall not be responsible for identifying patents for which a license may be required by a document and/or IEEE-ISTO Industry Group Standard or for conducting inquiries into the legal validity or scope of those patents that are brought to its attention. Inquiries may be submitted to the IEEE-ISTO by e-mail at: [email protected].

The Printer Working Group acknowledges that the IEEE-ISTO (acting itself or through its designees) is, and shall at all times, be the sole entity that may authorize the use of certification marks, trademarks, or other special designations to indicate compliance with these materials.

Use of this document is wholly voluntary. The existence of this document does not imply that there are no other ways to produce, test, measure, purchase, market, or provide other goods and services related to its scope.

Page 2 of 90 Copyright © 2015 The Printer Working Group. All rights reserved.

12

22

2324252627282930

31

32333435

363738

3940414243

44454647484950

51525354

55565758

3


About the IEEE-ISTO

The IEEE-ISTO is a not-for-profit corporation offering industry groups an innovative and flexible operational forum and support services. The IEEE-ISTO provides a forum not only to develop standards, but also to facilitate activities that support the implementation and acceptance of standards in the marketplace. The organization is affiliated with the IEEE (http://www.ieee.org/) and the IEEE Standards Association (http://standards.ieee.org/).

For additional information regarding the IEEE-ISTO and its industry programs visit:

http://www.ieee-isto.org

About the IEEE-ISTO PWG

The Printer Working Group (or PWG) is a Program of the IEEE Industry Standards and Technology Organization (ISTO) with member organizations including printer manufacturers, print server developers, operating system providers, network operating systems providers, network connectivity vendors, and print management application developers. The group is chartered to make printers and the applications and operating systems supporting them work together better. All references to the PWG in this document implicitly mean “The Printer Working Group, a Program of the IEEE ISTO.” In order to meet this objective, the PWG will document the results of their work as open standards that define print related protocols, interfaces, procedures and conventions. Printer manufacturers and vendors of printer related software will benefit from the interoperability provided by voluntary conformance to these standards.

In general, a PWG standard is a specification that is stable, well understood, and is technically competent, has multiple, independent and interoperable implementations with substantial operational experience, and enjoys significant public support.

For additional information regarding the Printer Working Group visit:

http://www.pwg.org

Contact information:

The Printer Working Groupc/o The IEEE Industry Standards and Technology Organization445 Hoes LanePiscataway, NJ 08854USA


45

59

606162636465

66

67

68

6970717273747576777879

808182

83

84

85

868788899091

6

http://www.ieee-isto.org/

http://standards.ieee.org/)

http://www.ieee.org/


About the Internet Printing Protocol Work Group

The Internet Printing Protocol (IPP) working group has developed a modern, full-featured network printing protocol, which is now the industry standard. IPP allows a print client to query a printer for its supported capabilities, features, and parameters to allow the selection of an appropriate printer for each print job. IPP also provides Job information prior to, during, and at the end of Job processing.

For additional information regarding IPP visit:

http://www.pwg.org/ipp/

Implementers of this specification are encouraged to join the IPP mailing list in order to participate in any discussions of the specification. Suggested additions, changes, or clarification to this specification, should be sent to the IPP mailing list for consideration.


78

92

9394959697

98

99

100101102

9


Table of Contents1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................82. Terminology......................................................................................................................8

2.1 Conformance Terminology..........................................................................................82.2 Imaging Terminology..................................................................................................82.3 Other Terminology......................................................................................................92.4 Acronyms and Organizations....................................................................................10

3. Requirements.................................................................................................................113.1 Rationale...................................................................................................................113.2 Use Cases................................................................................................................11

3.2.1 Developer Implementing IPP Client Support......................................................113.2.2 Developer Implementing IPP Printer Support.....................................................11

3.3 Out of Scope.............................................................................................................113.4 Design Requirements...............................................................................................12

4. Client Tasks and Implementation Alternatives................................................................124.1 Finding A Printer.......................................................................................................13

4.1.1 Discover And Select A Printer Via A Discovery Protocol....................................134.1.2 Select A Printer Via Static Hostname Or Address..............................................16

4.2 Validate Printer Reachability and User Access.........................................................184.3 Identify a Printer........................................................................................................214.4 Get Printer Capabilities.............................................................................................244.5 Check Constraints Between Print Options................................................................284.6 Submitting a Print Job...............................................................................................34

4.6.1 Submitting A Job With Document Data..............................................................354.6.2 Submitting A Job With Document References...................................................384.6.3 Handling Print Job Creation Errors.....................................................................42

4.7 Submitting a FaxOut Job..........................................................................................434.8 Monitoring Job Status...............................................................................................444.9 Canceling a Print Job During Job or Document Creation.........................................494.10 Getting Printer Supplies Status...............................................................................524.11 Error Handling.........................................................................................................55

5. Using and Evaluating IPP Attributes...............................................................................555.1 Job Template Attributes And Value Binding..............................................................55

5.1.1 IPP Client Recommendations.............................................................................565.1.2 IPP Printer Recommendations...........................................................................56

5.2 Document Format Selection......................................................................................565.2.1 IPP Client Recommendations.............................................................................575.2.2 IPP Printer Recommendations...........................................................................57

5.3 Prefer "media-col" Attribute To "media" Attribute......................................................575.3.1 IPP Client Recommendations.............................................................................575.3.2 IPP Printer Recommendations...........................................................................58

5.4 Extended Finishings Options With "finishings-col-XXX"............................................585.4.1 IPP Client Recommendations.............................................................................585.4.2 IPP Printer Recommendations...........................................................................58

5.5 Controlling Intended Output Using "ipp-attribute-fidelity", "job-mandatory-attributes", and "pdl-override-supported"..........................................................................................58


1011

103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148

12


5.5.1 IPP Client Recommendations.............................................................................595.5.2 IPP Printer Recommendations...........................................................................59

5.6 Prefer "multiple-document-handling" For Copies Collation.......................................605.6.1 IPP Client Recommendations.............................................................................605.6.2 IPP Printer Recommendations...........................................................................60

5.7 Specify "orientation-requested" For Supported Document Types.............................605.7.1 IPP Client Recommendations.............................................................................605.7.2 IPP Printer Recommendations...........................................................................61

5.8 Evaluating Printer Capability Attributes.....................................................................615.8.1 document-format-supported / document-format.................................................625.8.2 printer-get-attributes-supported..........................................................................625.8.3 document-format-varying-attributes....................................................................625.8.4 ipp-features-supported.......................................................................................635.8.5 printer-config-change-date-time and printer-config-change-time........................635.8.6 xxx-supported and xxx-default............................................................................635.8.7 xxx-supported vs. xxx-ready...............................................................................645.8.8 job-creation-attributes-supported........................................................................645.8.9 document-creation-attributes-supported.............................................................645.8.10 job-settable-attributes-supported......................................................................645.8.11 media-col-ready vs. media-col-database..........................................................65

5.9 Resolving Job Attribute Conflicts and Constraints....................................................655.10 IPP Object Status Attributes....................................................................................68

5.10.1 Printer Status....................................................................................................685.10.2 Job Status........................................................................................................685.10.3 Document Status..............................................................................................68

5.11 IPP Notifications Attributes......................................................................................696. IPP Document Page Order.............................................................................................697. IPP Printer Best Practices..............................................................................................70

7.1 IPP Objects and URI Resource Paths......................................................................707.2 Fax Destination URIs................................................................................................717.3 Printer Resource URIs..............................................................................................717.4 Error Reporting.........................................................................................................71

8. HTTP Protocol Use.........................................................................................................718.1 New HTTP/1.1 Specifications...................................................................................71

8.1.1 HTTP Client........................................................................................................728.1.2 HTTP Server......................................................................................................72

8.2 HTTP/1.1 Expect Header..........................................................................................728.2.1 HTTP Client........................................................................................................728.2.2 HTTP Server......................................................................................................73

8.3 "Host" Header Field..................................................................................................738.3.1 HTTP Client........................................................................................................738.3.2 HTTP Server......................................................................................................73

8.4 If-Modified-Since, Last-Modified, and 304 Not Modified...........................................738.4.1 HTTP Client........................................................................................................748.4.2 HTTP Server......................................................................................................74

8.5 Cache-Control...........................................................................................................74


1314

149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194

15


8.5.1 HTTP Client........................................................................................................748.5.2 HTTP Server......................................................................................................74

9. Important Implementation Options..................................................................................749.1 Job Receipts: The "xxx-actual" Attributes.................................................................749.2 Printer Constraints: The "preferred-attributes" Attribute............................................75

10. Conformance Recommendations.................................................................................7510.1 Client Conformance Recommendations.................................................................7510.2 Printer Conformance Recommendations................................................................75

11. Internationalization Considerations...............................................................................7611.1 Client Considerations..............................................................................................7611.2 Server Considerations............................................................................................76

12. Security Considerations................................................................................................7612.1 Client Security Considerations................................................................................76

12.1.1 HTTP/1.1 Expect Header.................................................................................7612.1.2 HTTP Upgrade.................................................................................................7712.1.3 Using The Validate-Job Operation...................................................................7712.1.4 Preferring The "ipps" URI Scheme...................................................................77

12.2 Server Security Considerations...............................................................................7712.2.1 HTTP/1.1 Expect Header.................................................................................7712.2.2 HTTP Upgrade.................................................................................................7712.2.3 Support For The "ipps" URI Scheme................................................................7712.2.4 DNS Rebinding.................................................................................................78

13. References...................................................................................................................7813.1 Informative References...........................................................................................78

14. Annex A: HTTP/2.0.......................................................................................................8115. Authors' Addresses.......................................................................................................8116. PlantUML Sequence Diagram Sources........................................................................8217. Change History.............................................................................................................82

17.1 February 5, 2013.....................................................................................................8217.2 March 20, 2013.......................................................................................................8217.3 May 13, 2013..........................................................................................................8217.4 July 19, 2013...........................................................................................................8317.5 September 22, 2013...............................................................................................8317.6 October 2, 2013......................................................................................................8317.7 January 3, 2014......................................................................................................8417.8 January 24, 2014....................................................................................................8417.9 April 10, 2014..........................................................................................................8417.10 May 13, 2014........................................................................................................8517.11 August 14, 2014....................................................................................................8517.12 November 13, 2014..............................................................................................8517.13 January 27, 2015..................................................................................................86


1617

195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238

18


1. IntroductionIPP defines a rich set of operations and attributes to support the many tasks and features that exist in a networked printing ecosystem. With IPP, it is possible to perform some tasks in a few different ways. The quality of the user experience will be affected by how the tasks are performed. The goal of this specification is to provide IPP Client and Printer implementors with guidance on how to implement their system well from the start to ensure a quality user experience.

2. Terminology

2.1 Conformance Terminology

Capitalized terms, such as MUST, MUST NOT, RECOMMENDED, REQUIRED, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, MAY, and OPTIONAL, have special meaning relating to conformance as defined in Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels [RFC2119]. The term CONDITIONALLY REQUIRED is additionally defined for a conformance requirement that applies to a particular capability or feature.

2.2 Imaging Terminology

Normative definitions and semantics of printing terms are imported from IETF Printer MIB v2 [RFC3805], IETF Finisher MIB [RFC3806], and IETF Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics [RFC2911].

This document also defines the following protocol roles in order to specify unambiguous conformance requirements:

Client: Initiator of outgoing IPP session requests and sender of outgoing IPP operation requests (Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1 [RFC7230] User Agent).

Device: A Logical or Physical Device associated with one or more Printers; also see section 2.3 of [RFC2911].

Document: An object created and managed by a Printer that contains the description, processing, and status information. A Document object can have attached data and is bound to a single Job.

Logical Device: a print server, software service, or gateway that processes jobs and either forwards or stores the processed Job or uses one or more Physical Devices to render output.

Physical Device: a device that renders output (typically on paper.)


1920

239

240241242243244245

246

247

248249250251252

253

254255256

257258

259260

261262

263264265

266267268

269

21


Printer: Listener for incoming IPP session requests and receiver of incoming IPP operation requests (Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1 [RFC7230] Server) that represents one or more Physical Devices or a Logical Device.

Imaging Device: A printer or other device that acts as a Printer.

Job: An object created and managed by a Printer that contains description, processing, and status information. The Job also contains zero or more Document objects.

2.3 Other Terminology

Direct Imaging: Printing, facsimile, and scanning performed by direct communication from the Client to an Imaging Device or local print server.

Directory Service: A Service providing query and enumeration of information using names or other identifiers.

Discovery: Finding Printers by querying or browsing local network segments or Enumeration of Directory or Name Services.

Report An Error: An Action taken by an IPP Client that includes informing the User that an error has been detected, and logging the condition in a robust manner.

Enumeration: Listing Printers that are registered with a Directory or other Service.

Indirect Imaging: Printing, facsimile, and scanning performed by communication from the Client and/or Imaging Device to an intermediary service in a different administrative domain, for example when the Client communicates with a third-party print service or when an Imaging Device communicates with a Cloud service.

Network Accessible Device: A Device that can be directly accessed by a Client.

Network Accessible/Accessibility: Refers to the ability of one device to communicate directly with another, for example a Client is able to connect to a Device, query for supported attributes, submit Job creation requests, and so forth.

Operator: A person or automata that typically oversees the Printer. The Operator is allowed to query and manage the Printer, Jobs and Documents based on site policy.

Secure Print: A print Job using the "document-password", "job-password", and/or "job-password-encryption" operation attributes to provide document and/or physical security. See [PWG5100.11], [PWG5100.13], and [PWG5100.16].

Service: Software providing access to physical, logical, or virtual resources assisting in the processing of queued Jobs.

User: A person or automata using a Client to communicate with a Printer.


2223

270271272

273

274275

276

277278

279280

281282

283284

285

286287288289

290

291292293

294295

296297298

299300

301

24


Zombie Job: A Job that was created using a Job Creation operation but that never had a Document associated with it, and that remains in a state of limbo.

2.4 Acronyms and Organizations

IANA: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, http://www.iana.org/

IEEE: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, http://www.ieee.org/

IETF: Internet Engineering Task Force, http://www.ietf.org/

ISO: International Organization for Standardization, http://www.iso.org/

PWG: Printer Working Group, http://www.pwg.org/


2526

302303

304

305

306

307

308

309

310

27


3. Requirements

3.1 Rationale

The "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Implementor's Guide" [RFC3196] was ratified in November 2001. Since that time many extensions to IPP have been ratified, and the scope of use of IPP has grown considerably. Given all these extensions to IPP, implementers will benefit from an updated best practices document that covers these extensions, as well as the core of IPP that has remained unchanged, to assist Client and Printer implementers in their efforts to provide the best possible user experience.

This specification asserts many normative recommendations using SHOULD. There are no MUST requirements in this specification.

3.2 Use Cases

3.2.1 Developer Implementing IPP Client Support

Garrett is a software engineer developing a new client platform that is adding system-level printing support. Many printers support IPP Everywhere [PWG5100.14], so he plans to implement IPP Everywhere printing support in his client platform. But IPP Everywhere and its related standards don't describe how to best use IPP for the various tasks his software needs to perform to deliver a quality client user experience. He finds the "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Implementor's Guide" [RFC3196], but finds its Client recommendations insufficient. Using the IPP Implementor's Guide v2.0 (IG), he is able to avoid some common design pitfalls and quickly deliver a quality IPP client experience.

3.2.2 Developer Implementing IPP Printer Support

Duncan is a firmware engineer at a printer vendor creating a new printer, and that printer includes support for IPP Everywhere. In reading the IPP Implementor's Guidev2.0 (IG), he can more accurately anticipate how some segment of clients implemented according to these practices are likely to behave, and more rapidly understand how the various operations can be used with one another to achieve certain tasks.

3.3 Out of Scope

The following are out of scope for this specification:

Definition of extensions or modifications to the Internet Printing Protocol Normative MUST statements regarding user experience Definitions of new file formats or modifications of existing file formats


2829

311

312

313314315316317318

319320

321

322

323324325326327328329330331

332

333334335336337

338

339

340341342

30


Definition of extensions or modifications to Hypertext Transport Protocol [RFC7230]

3.4 Design Requirements

The design requirements for this specification are:

Identify common tasks performed by Clients and Printers Enumerate a series of implementation alternatives Rank those alternatives according to a qualitative grading scheme Discuss proper use of IPP attributes related to the implementation alternatives

and related implementation considerations, including security considerations

4. Client Tasks and Implementation AlternativesA user needs to do certain tasks in order to engage the user's computer with a printer. If that printer is an IPP Printer and the user's computer has an IPP Client, the IPP Client needs to perform certain tasks to provide a basic level of service to the user. A well-implemented Client also performs additional tasks to provide a high quality user experience. A fully featured and well-implemented IPP Client will support all the following tasks:

Find a Printer Validate Printer reachability and User accessibility Identify a Printer Get Printer capabilities Identify and resolve conflicts between a User's feature choices Submit a Job to a Printer, whether a Print Job, FaxOut Job, or Scan Job Monitor Job Status Cancel a Job Getting Printer Supplies Status

Each task is covered in this section, including descriptions of implementation alternatives. Each alternative will be labeled according to its perceived quality, using the following labels, which are listed in order from least desirable to most desirable:

BAD POOR FAIR GOOD BETTER BEST

The most preferred alternative for each task will always be labeled "BEST". Options labeled as "BAD", "POOR" or "FAIR" should be avoided.


3132

343344

345

346

347348349350351

352

353354355356357358

359360361362363364365366367

368369370

371372373374375376

377378

33


The task implementations are described using UML sequence diagrams, which provide methods for describing parallel activity, asynchronous activity, iteration, logical branching, and similar constructs.

4.1 Finding A Printer

In order to use a Printer, the Client system needs to connect to it. For a connection to be established, the Client needs to first acquire the Printer's address.

Historically, setting up a printer on a client system included creating persistent local records for that printer to identify drivers needed to communicate at different levels. The number of printers or other devices the user’s system would encounter was small and fairly static. Network discovery protocols were not broadly used.

Recently, the relationship between Client and Printer has become more "dynamic". Clients discover available standardized print services matched to "universal" drivers rather than model-specific ones. These universal drivers acquire that print service instance's capabilities and other attributes by interrogating the chosen print service using sophisticated protocols such as IPP. Based on that, the universal driver provides a set of features based on device information rather than pre-distributed model information (model-specific drivers). This set of capabilities can be acquired at each time the User wishes to print, rather than once when the "print queue" has been created on the Client. In this paradigm, a persistent binding between a driver and a print service (what has historically been referred to as a "print queue") is more like a Web browser bookmark, and need not be persisted except as a "favorite" or "recently used printer" as a convenience to the User.

Even with the recent driver / printer interface standardization and widespread implementation, there are various use cases where the user acquires the Printer's DNS host name or network address and wishes to contact the Printer directly rather than looking it up via a service discovery or directory protocol. Examples of this include: the target printer does not reside within the scope that the discovery protocol service, or when the user has acquired a URI, host name or network address from a banner near the printer. These use cases will continue to be important for the foreseeable future.

4.1.1 Discover And Select A Printer Via A Discovery Protocol

Discovery protocols such as DNS-SD, SLP, WS-Discovery and UPnP SSDP, as well as directory protocols such as LDAP, allow a user to find instances of print services or printers without having to perform a survey in physical space to acquire devices' addresses. Service discovery queries are sent via broadcast or multicast to all hosts within scope, or unicast to a directory server. The query specifies the desired service types or device types. Replies to those queries are processed and presented to the user.


3435

379380381

382

383384

385386387388

389390391392393394395396397398399400

401402403404405406407

408

409410411412413414415

36


Regardless of the actual discovery protocol used, the APIs driving the protocols generally can be used in either a synchronous or asynchronous fashion. Unfortunately, many legacy software systems (as well as developers) are accustomed to the synchronous model, which is easily identified by the presence of a "refresh button". The synchronous model is not as user friendly as the asynchronous model, but it is somewhat easier to write programs in a synchronous way than an asynchronous way.

Alternatives

POOR:o Perform network discovery with a synchronous API; present static results

after short discovery process period; provide "Refresh" button to restart the process

Figure 1: Discover and Select A Printer Via A Discovery Protocol - POOR


3738

416417418419420421

422

423424425426427

428

429

430

39


BETTER:o Same as "POOR" above but user interface self-refreshes every few seconds

in a worker thread that refreshes the UI owned by the main thread (or equivalent).

Figure 2: Discover and Select A Printer Via A Discovery Protocol - BETTER


4041

431432433434435

436

437

438

42


BEST:o Perform network discovery with an asynchronous API for "live" results and

timely, responsive user experience

Figure 3: Discover and Select A Printer Via A Discovery Protocol - BEST

4.1.2 Select A Printer Via Static Hostname Or Address

A Printer is identified in IPP by a URI. The URI identifies a specific resource that is relevant only on the host where the Printer resides. A URI is not typically provided directly to a User; a simple host name or network address is more common.

The "printer-uri-supported" Printer attribute enumerates the allowed URIs on the host system. This attribute can be retrieved via a Get-Printer-Attributes operation. This can be a circular problem since the Client must know at least one of the allowed resource paths to perform a Get-Printer-Attributes operation. If all Printers implement well-known resource paths, this problem can be avoided.


4344

439440441442

443

444

445

446

447448449

450451452453454455

45


Alternatives

POOR: Each printer model chooses an arbitrary default resource path. The Client must depend on some mechanism out-of-band of IPP to get the resource path. This exposes too many protocol details to the User. Users need not be aware of which print protocol is being used.

Figure 4: Select A Printer Via Static Hostname Or Address - POOR

BETTER: Use a well-known, commonly specified resource path: "/ipp/print"o Not universally implementedo Recommendation to be added to IPP Everywhere [PWG5100.14]

Figure 5: Select A Printer Via Static Hostname Or Address - BETTER


4647

456

457458459460461

462

463

464465466467

468

469

48



4950

470

51


BEST: Get a list of all URIs for the default Print service, from a common neutral resource path: "/"

o Allows variance and different Printer Objects to be foundo Not widely implemented, but recommended in IPP Everywhere

[PWG5100.14]

Figure 6: Select A Printer Via Static Hostname Or Address - BEST

4.2 Validate Printer Reachability and User Access

Once a Printer's address has been acquired, the Client ought to communicate with the Printer to confirm that the Printer is reachable by the Client. The Client SHOULD validate that the Printer is reachable via one of the IPP transports supported by the Client system. Once reachability has been validated, the Client SHOULD validate that the Printer would allow the User operating the Client to use it. The Client SHOULD validate reachability and user access as a precondition to acquiring the Printer's capabilities, which can occur before submitting a Job or before creating a persistent queue or possibly both. If the User is allowed to set up the Client to use a particular Printer, but denied the use of that Printer, the User will most likely be disappointed. If the Printer implements IPPS [RFC-IPPS] and a self-signed TLS certificate, the Client user experience should be managed in such a way that it allows the user to establish trust with unfamiliar devices or credentials, without scaring them away or concealing important details.


5253

471472473474475476

477

478

479

480481482483484485486487488489490491492493

54


Alternatives

BAD: Do Nothingo Reachability and access not checked; user could easily be disappointed

Figure 7: Validate Printer Reachability and User Access - BAD

FAIR: Validate reachability using a non-IPP protocol (ICMP echo, SNMP GET, etc.)o Validates reachabilityo No validation that IPP service is available on target hosto No validation that the user has access rights to the IPP Printer Object


5556

494

495496497

498

499

500501502503504

57


Figure 8: Validate Printer Reachability and User Access - FAIR

BETTER: IPP Get-Printer-Attributeso Validates reachabilityo Validates IPP Printer object is available on target hosto No validation that the user has access rights to the IPP Printer Object

Figure 9: Validate Printer Reachability and User Access - BETTER


5859

505

506

507508509510511

512

513

514

60


BEST: IPP Get-Printer-Attributes + IPP Validate-Jobo Validates reachabilityo Validates IPP service is available on target hosto Validates user has access rights to the IPP Printer Object

Figure 10: Validate Printer Reachability and User Access - BEST

4.3 Identify a Printer

There are situations where a Client has discovered a Printer on a network, and the User would like to determine its location in physical space, so they can find where to retrieve their printed job. Or the user may want to confirm that the printer they are standing in front of is the printer found on the network. This is increasingly important for users who are printing from highly portable devices such as smartphones or tablets.

The Identify-Printer operation [PWG5100.13] provides a method for a Client to request that the Printer do something to identify itself. It is preferable for the Client to


6162

515516517518519

520

521

522

523524525526527

528529

63



6465

530

66


Alternatives

BAD: Client does nothing; User guesses which printero Subpar user experience

Figure 11: Identify a Printer - BAD

POOR: IPP Print-Job with special "identify page"o Only useful to validate the printer nearby is the printer discoveredo If it is the "wrong printer" the page will come out of an unexpected printero Printing throwaway pages for this purpose can annoy the Printer's owner

Figure 12: Identify a Printer - POOR


6768

531

532533534

535

536

537538539540541

542

543

69



7071

544

72


BEST: IPP Identify-Printero Add audio indicators only if the user cannot find it using visual means alone,

to avoid causing audio disturbance to others nearby the Printer

Figure 13: Identify a Printer - BEST

4.4 Get Printer Capabilities

Once the user has selected a printer, the Client needs to determine the Printer's capabilities in order to whether and how it can produce Jobs the Printer can process. The Printer's capabilities will include supported Document formats, Job processing alternatives such as "number of copies", "2-sided printing", and perhaps other features. Some capabilities can vary depending on the Document format. It also includes other information about the device itself, such as its model type, location, and so forth.

Traditionally, the Printer's capabilities would be acquired from the drivers bound to that Printer's print queue. A Client binds drivers by matching model identifiers in the driver with model identifiers acquired from the Printer. The Printer's capabilities were assumed to be relatively static; for the Client to get an up-to-date set of the Printer's capabilities the print queue would have to be destroyed and re-created. If driver matching fails because a driver was missing, the Client could not use the Printer because the queue would not get created. Deploying drivers before the user needed them was essential to avoid this problem.

Recently, "universal" printing systems such as IPP Everywhere have emerged that have enabled the Client / Printer relationship to become more dynamic. These systems define a base set of functionality along with methods to describe and use additional features that are agnostic to a particular Printer model. Clients that support these systems no longer depend on model-specific drivers to determine the Printer's capabilities if the Printer also supports the system. This also enables the Client to


7374

545546547548

549

550

551

552553554555556557

558559560561562563564565

566567568569570571

75


acquire a Printer's capabilities at the time the User indicates a desire to print. The Client can interrogate the Printer to determine its capabilities and present the available printing options in a just-in-time fashion. This enables more dynamic connection workflows that were impractical with the traditional model.

Alternatives

BAD: Assume all Printers have the same capabilitieso Example: a print queue using a "generic PPD"

Figure 14: Get Printer Capabilities - BAD


7677

572573574575

576

577578579

580

581

582

78


POOR: Match model to matching driver (e.g. model-specific PPD file) to acquire list of options supported by the target device; match using non-IPP protocol(s)

o All "legacy style" model specific print drivers are an example of this alternative.

o Printer capability detection using feature identifiers is preferable to detection keying off a model identifier, especially in the case where the source is a statically authored knowledge such as a PPD

Figure 15: Get Printer Capabilities - POOR


7980

583584585586587588589590

591

592

593

81


FAIR: Match model to matching driver (e.g. model-specific PPD file) to acquire list of options supported by the target device; match using IPP operations

o Using IPP rather than another protocol means only one protocol is used for printer capability evaluation and job submission, even with traditional driver use models

Figure 16: Get Printer Capabilities - FAIR


8283

594595596597598599

600

601

602

84


BEST: Perform a Get-Printer-Attributes operation, sending "document-format" and other attributes that allow filtering. If needed, start with an initial Get-Printer-Attributes with no filtering attributes, or acquire Printer information via some other method, to get the set of filterable attributes from the Printer

Figure 17: Get Printer Capabilities - BEST

4.5 Check Constraints Between Print Options

Printer features and options are presented typically in a print dialog. Some of these have states that have relationships with other options' states, where one cannot be in a particular state if another one is too. These are known as "constraints". Constraints need to be re-evaluated any time a control changes state. There are a few different ways this can be done via IPP.


8586

603604605606607

608

609

610

611612613614615

616

87


Alternatives

BAD: Do nothing

Figure 18: Check Constraints Between Print Options - BAD


8889

617

618619

620

621

622

90


POOR: Perform IPP Validate-Job every time a control changes Uses IPP but badly thrashes the network

Figure 19: Check Constraints Between Print Options - POOR


9192

623624625

626

627

93


FAIR: Use local model-specific data (i.e. PPDs)o This is preferable because at least it doesn't thrash the network

Figure 20: Check Constraints Between Print Options - FAIR


9495

628629630

631

632

633

96


GOOD:o IPP Validate-Job

When "Print" button is pressed, confirms the Job creation / submission will succeed (authentication, etc.)

Client depends on this operation to perform constraints validation printer-side, checking for errors along with "preferred-attributes"

Figure 21: Check Constraints Between Print Options - GOOD


9798

634635636637638639640

641

642

643

99


BETTER: Use "job-constraints-supported" and "job-resolvers-supported"

Figure 22: Check Constraints Between Print Options - BETTER


100101

644645

646

647

648

102


BEST: Use "job-constraints-supported" and "job-resolvers-supported" as well as IPP Validate-Job

Figure 23: Check Constraints Between Print Options - BEST

4.6 Submitting a Print Job

Once the user has selected the desired Job options, the print content is generated, and both the Job options and the content is made available to the printer so that it can be printed. There are several different ways this can be done with IPP.

The first set of alternatives a Client must consider involves how the Document content is conveyed to the Printer. The Client can submit document content via an IPP operation. Alternately, the Client can submit to the Printer a URI reference to a Document, with the expectation that the Printer will retrieve the Document itself at Job processing time.

IPP also provides two methods for requesting that a Printer create a new Job. They differ in the number of operations that are needed. The first method, supported by Print-Job and Print-URI, create the Job and provide the document content or reference all in one operation. The second method creates the Job using the Create-Job operation, submits Document content to the Job via separate Send-Document or Send-URI operations, and might conclude with a Close-Job operation. This second more verbose method is preferred because it provides more opportunities for the Printer to provide control over


103104

649650651

652

653

654

655656657

658659660661662

663664665666667668669670

671

105


4.6.1 Submitting A Job With Document Data

This is the classical way that a print Job is sent from the Client to the print service: first a Job is created, and then the Job information and payload content are sent from the Client to the print service.

Alternatives

POOR: Send the job with IPP Print-Jobo The printer can reject it but only after it has been transmitted. IPP would

never respond early; HTTP could respond early but that would be effectively a transport level exception outside the scope of IPP. Better to check ticket and content types first.

Figure 24: Submitting A Job With Document Data - POOR


106107672

673674675

676

677678679680681682

683

684

685

108


GOOD: Pre-flight the job with Validate-Job, then submit it using Print-Jobo Doesn’t work well with flow-controlled (low-end) printers

Figure 25: Submitting A Job with Document Data - GOOD


109110

686687688

689

690

691

111


BETTER: IPP Create-Job / IPP Send-Document

Figure 26: Submitting A Job with Document Data - BETTER


112113

692693

694

695

696

114


BEST: IPP Validate-Job / IPP Create-Job / IPP Send-Document / IPP Close-Job

Figure 27: Submitting A Job with Document Data - BEST

4.6.2 Submitting A Job With Document References

This is a slightly different method for the Document content to be available to the Printer. The notion generally consists of creating a Job and then including in the Job references to documents that the Printer will itself "pull" into the Job. The documents might be on the Client but don't have to be.

This method can be potentially useful for working around certain network topology scenarios or limiting the need for the Client to be transmitting the content directly to the Printer across an expensive link. But there are risks to using this method. If the document is reachable by the Client system but not the Printer, the Job will fail. Reachability can be affected by network topology, authorization, or other factors. And since there can be a time delay between Job creation and Job processing, it could be that reachability problems are not discovered in a timely manner. Therefore, this Implementor's Guide generally advises against using this method unless robust


115116

697698

699

700

701

702703704705

706707708709710711712713

117


mechanisms are in place to avoid such reachability issues; the Client SHOULD provide URIs that are stable for the life of the Job.


118119714715

120


Alternatives

POOR: IPP Print-URIo No pre-flight checkso Printer can reject it but only after it has been transmittedo Better to check ticket and content types first

Figure 28: Submitting A Job With Document References - POOR


121122

716

717718719720721

722

723

724

123


GOOD: IPP Validate-Job / IPP Print-URIo URI might not be accessible at time of processing

Figure 29: Submitting A Job With Document References - GOOD


124125

725726727

728

729

730

126


BETTER: IPP Create-Job / IPP Send-URIo URI might not be accessible at time of processing

Figure 30: Submitting A Job With Document References - BETTER


127128

731732733

734

735

736

129


BEST: IPP Validate-Job / IPP Create-Job / IPP Send-URI / IPP Close-Jobo URI equivalent to §4.6.1; better to submit document data to avoid potential

URI accessibility issues

Figure 31: Submitting A Job With Document References - BEST

4.6.3 Handling Print Job Creation Errors

If the IPP Printer reports an error during the process of creating the Job or submitting the Documents to that job, it is best if the Client takes action to ensure that the malformed Job doesn't turn into a "Zombie Job", which is a form of digital pollution.


130131

737738739740

741

742

743

744745746

747

132


Alternatives

POOR: Do nothing; leave the malformed Job on the Printer

Figure 32: Handling Print Job Creation Errors - POOR

BEST: Use IPP Cancel-Job to cancel the job to clean up the malformed Job

Figure 334.6.3 Handling Print Job Creation Errors - BEST

4.7 Submitting a FaxOut Job

The process recommendations for submitting a Job to an IPP FaxOut service are identical to those in §4.6.1 and §4.6.2 for conventional Print Job submission.


133134

748

749750

751

752

753754

755

756

757

758759

135


4.8 Monitoring Job Status

While the Job is being processed, users might wish to know whether it is proceeding successfully, or whether there are conditions that they need to handle that are preventing processing from proceeding, such as a media jam, open covers, marking agents depleted, and so forth.

To provide this using IPP, a Client SHOULD monitor the status of the various IPP objects involved, including the Printer, the Job, and Documents within that Job. A Client SHOULD monitor the status of a Job submitted to a Printer and SHOULD continue to monitor it until it has been successfully printed.

The basic system for monitoring IPP object status is to periodically submit one or more IPP operations to retrieve these objects' status. Obviously, this is "polling", and as with most polling based systems, this doesn't scale well and causes frequent unnecessary updates to be communicated. Ideally, this would be avoided and replaced with a system based on asynchronous event notifications.

IPP has an event notification system ([RFC3995], [RFC3996], [RFC3997]). Unfortunately, this system has been largely overlooked. Both IPP Clients and Printers can support IPP notifications to minimize network traffic and monitoring overhead. Section 5.11 discusses this in more detail.

For those options below that involve polling the Printer Object, the degree to which the option is better or worse is due in no small part to the polling frequency. The interval SHOULD be tuned so that the frequency of queries is not so great that it burdens the Printer Object or Job Object or the network, but not so small that there is an undesirable lag between when an event occurs and when the user is notified. It is always a bad practice in any case if a Client is polling as fast as the network can handle traffic. When polling the Printer Object, the Client SHOULD NOT poll as fast as the network can handle traffic; it SHOULD instead tune its polling interval to achieve a suitable balance between user responsiveness and resource overuse.

In some cases the Client will cease monitoring the Job once the Job Creation or Document Creation operations have concluded. There are many scenarios where the User would prefer to be notified about Job status until the Job has finished being processed. For example, with a Job requesting 500 copies of a document containing 4 pages, the Job Creation operations most likely will conclude minutes before the Job has concluded being processed by the Printer. A well-implemented Client SHOULD monitor Job status until the Job has reached a terminal state. If IPP Subscriptions are used, these notifications can be monitored and received quite a long time after the Job Creation operations have been performed.


136137760

761762763764

765766767768

769770771772773

774775776777

778779780781782783784785786

787788789790791792793794795

796

138


Alternatives

BAD: Poll Printer for general Printer status instead of precise Job statuso Polling all status information needlessly uses a large number of resources

(network bandwidth, printer CPU)o Polling for status without the actual Job ID is imprecise

Figure 34: Monitoring Job Status - BAD


139140

797

798799800801802

803

804

805

141


POOR: Poll for Job status using Get-Job-Attributeso Monitor the Job with ID acquired earlier, according to a polling interval

Figure 35: Monitoring Job Status - POOR


142143

806807808

809

810

811

144


GOOD: Monitor both Job and Printer status, but restricting Printer status to only attributes germane to status monitoring

o Monitor the value of "printer-state" attribute as well as targeted monitoring of a specific job's status

o Only ask for the attributes you need, to minimize the bandwidth needed for the information being used.

Figure 36: Monitoring Job Status - GOOD


145146

812813814815816817818

819

820

821

147


BETTER: Use IPP Event Notifications and Subscriptions [RFC3995] Asynchronous / long running queries for notifications that don’t require

polling When Job has completed, query the state of that job Printer state changes will be provided by subscribing to the printer;

subscribing to the Job will provide less information and not be as useful

Figure 37: Monitoring Job Status - BETTER


148149

822823824825826827828829

830

831

832

150


BEST: Create the Job using methods in section 4.6 and include the Subscriptions group in the Job Creation operation request; then monitor using the IPP Event Notifications and Subscriptions method [RFC3995]

o Most optimal if IPP Create-Job / IPP Send-Document is used so that the Job URI is positively sent by the Printer Object

Figure 38: Monitoring Job Status - BEST

4.9 Canceling a Print Job During Job or Document Creation

Situations arise where the user wants to terminate a Job before it is processed. This can occur before the Job's Documents have been completely transmitted to the Printer, or it might occur after the Job has been created but is awaiting processing. If the Job has already been completely created successfully, the Job can be terminated simply using an IPP Cancel-Job operation.

If the Job hasn't been fully created yet there is the risk that artifacts of that incomplete Job might remain. A well-implemented Client SHOULD clean up such artifacts if the Job is not completely created or it’s Documents not all submitted; leaving broken Job objects abandoned on the Printer is bad form.

There is some a dependency between the options below and how the Job was submitted. Adopting a high quality option from those listed below will likely depend on implementing a high quality option from §4.6.


151152

833834835836837838

839

840

841

842843844845846

847848849850

851852853

153


Alternatives

BAD: Stop sending octets and abandon the connectiono Abandoned connection after some successful data transmission may allow

Job artifacts to linger

Figure 39: Canceling a Print Job During Job or Document Creation - BAD


154155

854

855856857858

859

860

861

156


GOOD: Stop sending on a page boundary; properly terminate Document during IPP Print-Job operation; IPP Cancel-Job to cancel the Job object

Figure 40: Canceling a Print Job During Job or Document Creation - GOOD


157158

862863864

865

866

867

159


BEST: Stop sending on a page boundary; properly terminate Document during IPP Send-Document operation; IPP Cancel-Job to cancel the Job object

Figure 41: Canceling a Print Job During Job or Document Creation - BEST

4.10 Getting Printer Supplies Status

Some administrative tasks, like checking or monitoring consumables levels, are presented to Users in print dialogs or job status dialogs. It could also be monitored by printer management software or device status monitoring software on User systems. A well implemented Client SHOULD provide supplies status. Ideally, the Client would check supplies status using publicly specified extensions to IPP.

Alternatives

BAD: Don't provide supplies statuso Not good for users or printer vendors


160161

868869870

871

872

873

874875876877878

879

880881882

162


POOR: Use some proprietary protocol or (possibly closed) platform-specific extension to IPP

o This falls short of the ideal that all devices implement a publicly specified and open extension to IPP

o Private extensions to IPP are less desirable than a publicly specified and open protocol other than IPP

GOOD: SNMP and standard printer MIBso Public standard but not IPP, so not ideal

Figure 42: Getting Printer Supplies Status - GOOD


163164

883884885886887888889

890891892

893

894

895

165


BETTER: IPP Get-Printer-Attributes to retrieve "printer-supply" attributeo Printer needs to implement "printer-supply" attributeo Supplies events in polling model can monitor "printer-state-reasons" for

'marker-toner-low' and similar states

Figure 43: Getting Printer Supplies Status - BETTER

BEST: Monitor supplies status using the IPP Event Notifications and Subscriptions method [RFC3995]

o Printer needs to implement "printer-supply" attribute to support this scenarioo Printer MAY send affected attributes, e.g. "printer-supply", "printer-input-tray",

"printer-output-tray", etc.


166167

896897898899900

901

902

903904905906907908

168


Figure 44: Getting Printer Supplies Status - BEST

4.11 Error Handling

When a Client receives notice of an error, there are various ways to present that to the Client's user. Possible response actions include: presenting messages to the user; flagging or filtering those messages to indicate their severity and recoverability; and logging the event in an appropriate way.

A Client SHOULD log errors using the PWG Common Log Format [PWG5110.3].

5. Using and Evaluating IPP AttributesSome attributes that IPP has labeled as optional should always be used as a best practice. Below are some of these attributes and how they should be used in various contexts.

5.1 Job Template Attributes And Value Binding

While it is technically possible for a Client to only send those Job Template attributes whose values do not match the default values, this strategy should be avoided. If the default were to change between Job submission time and Job processing time, the resulting print Job might not meet user expectations. These default values should only be used for setting the initial state of Job Template attribute choice options for the User.


169170

909

910

911

912913914915

916

917

918919920

921

922923924925926

171


This not only ensures the user’s expectations are met; it also makes implementing the client simpler because the Client doesn’t need to maintain any knowledge of whether the value chosen by the user matches the default provided by the Printer when the Job Template attributes were fetched to populate the user selection choices.

A Printer conveys its Job Template attributes’ default values using the “xxx-default” attributes. These attributes indicate the value the Printer will use if the Client does not provide that Job Template attribute at Job Creation time. The "xxx-actual" attributes reported by the IPP Printer in its operation response will report the values that are bound to the Job.

Using the “sides” Job Template attribute as an example, if the Printer reports that “sides-default” is 'one-sided' and “sides-supported” is {‘one-sided', 'two-sided-long-edge', 'two-sided-short-edge’}, a well-implemented Client SHOULD populate its "sides" Job option choice with the value from "sides-default": 'one-sided'. If the user makes some other choice, then the "sides" attribute would be updated to hold that new value. Once the user was satisfied with the choices and had requested the Job be printed, the Client would include the “sides” attribute and the value it holds in the Job Creation operation. Changes on the Printer to "sides-default" between the time the Job was submitted and the time it is processed will have no effect on the Job.

To help eliminate these pitfalls even for Clients that are poorly implemented and don't submit attributes that match the "xxx-default", a well-implemented Printer MAY bind Job Template attribute default values to each Job Template attribute at Job Creation time rather than waiting to do so at Job processing time, to help ensure user expectations.

5.1.1 IPP Client Recommendations

A Client SHOULD plan to submit all Job template attributes at Job creation time. A Client SHOULD set the initial state of each Job Template attribute to the corresponding Job Template attribute default value, if one exists.

5.1.2 IPP Printer Recommendations

A Printer SHOULD make that value binding visible to Clients as soon as possible by setting the xxx-actual Job Status attribute using that value as well.

5.2 Document Format Selection

A Client uses the “document-format” attribute in several ways. The Client evaluates the Printer’s document-format-supported attribute to decide on the most appropriate document format type. Once the Client has selected a format, it should perform a second Get-Printer-Attributes operation including "document-format" in the request, to request the Printer send the set of Job Template attributes and attribute values that correspond to that document format. This is discussed in detail in §4.4.


172173927928929930

931932933934935

936937938939940941942943944

945946947948

949

950951952

953

954955

956

957958959960961962

174


Several factors, including time delays between Job receipt and Job processing as well as implementation challenges, can prevent an IPP Printer from receiving robust and timely feedback from its document format interpreter and rendering engine about the document content submitted with a job. It is important for the Client to be as descriptive as possible about the construction of the Job, including not only that Job’s IPP attributes but also accurately reporting the document format for each Document associated with that Job.


As with all other Job Template attributes, a Client SHOULD include the "document-format" attribute with all Job creation operations, with the value set to the actual MIME Media type of the document format to be submitted to the Printer. A Client SHOULD NOT submit a Job with the “document-format” attribute specifying “application/octet-stream” as the document format.


A Printer SHOULD NOT implement 'application/octet-stream' as the only document format. A Printer SHOULD list all the document formats it supports (even vendor-specific ones) via the "document-format-supported" attribute. A Printer SHOULD NOT use 'application/octet-stream' as its "document-format-default".

A Printer SHOULD send the "document-format-actual" attribute in relevant IPP responses to report the detected MIME media type. If a request contains a document payload, the Printer SHOULD send the "document-format-actual" attribute value in the IPP operation response. The value of "document-format-actual" SHOULD be the detected format of the payload, not simply the value of the "document-format" attribute sent by the Client in the request.

5.3 Prefer "media-col" Attribute To "media" Attribute

The "media-col" attribute provides finer and more reliable control over media selection. As an example, the "media-col.media-size" sub-attribute is defined using integer value types rather than floating point value types, which avoids floating point calculation problems when converting between PWG size names and dimensions.


Given a Printer Object that supports both "media" and "media-col" attributes, a Client SHOULD prefer to use the "media-col" attribute with operations that accept it. This is true for when "media" and "media-col" are top-level attributes as well as when "media" or "media-col" might be included within other collection attributes, such as "job-sheets", "job-error-sheet", "job-accounting-sheets", and others.


175176963964965966967968969

970

971972973974975

976

977978979980

981982983984985986

987

988989990991

992

993994995996997

177



The Printer SHOULD allow for a limited degree of inaccuracy even with "media-col.media-size". If the dimensions are off by a small amount (1-3 units) this SHOULD NOT be regarded by the Printer as a mismatch.

For more discussion of the "media-xxx" attributes, see §5.8.11.

5.4 Extended Finishings Options With "finishings-col-XXX"

The IPP "finishings", "finishings-supported" and "finishings-default" attributes [RFC2911] define a basic mechanism for describing finishings capabilities. The "finishings-col-XXX" attributes [PWG5100.1] [PWG5100.3] extend the "finishings-XXX" attribute set by providing a mechanism to convey detailed description of finishing settings. In certain contexts, it is advantageous to use "finishings-col" rather than "finishings" to describe the finishings options, if the Printer supports both. A Printer can precisely describe the implementation underlying each "finishings" keyword using corresponding "finishings-col-database" and "finishings-col-ready" entries. A Client can use these detailed descriptions to provide an accurate print preview, and also provide a scalable user experience that can be simple but allow more detailed user control if desired.


A Client SHOULD support "finishings-col-XXX" [PWG5100.1] to allow it to acquire from the Printer detailed descriptions of each value listed in "finishings-supported". This is especially important if the Client needs to map between IPP and JDF or other rich Job ticket formats.


A Printer SHOULD support IPP Finishings 2.0 [PWG5100.1].

5.5 Controlling Intended Output Using "ipp-attribute-fidelity", "job-mandatory-attributes", and "pdl-override-supported"

There are two attributes that might be used by a Client to control whether a print Job will print EXACTLY as requested, or alternately print with "best effort" but might not comply with all requested Job attributes. These attributes are listed below, each with a synopsis of their meaning and purpose.

ipp-attribute-fidelity [RFC2911] - Attribute provided by IPP Client in Job submission operations. If absent the IPP Printer will assume the value is "false". If present and value is "true" then the IPP Printer is required to support all Job attributes and attribute values included in the Job submission operation or else the IPP Printer is required to reject the operation.


178179998

99910001001

1002

1003

10041005100610071008100910101011101210131014

1015

1016101710181019

1020

1021

10221023

1024102510261027

10281029103010311032

180


job-mandatory-attributes [PWG5100.7] - Identifies which Job Template attributes the Printer is required to support in this Job Creation request in order to accept the Job. This allows the IPP Client to specify at a finer level of granularity those attributes that need to be supported. If job-mandatory-attributes is included and it lists all the Job attributes, this is equivalent to including the ipp-attribute-fidelity attribute with value set to "true".

Additionally, a Client can use the following attribute to determine whether the IPP Printer can prefer IPP provided attributes to attributes embedded in the document content itself.

pdl-override-supported [RFC2911] - Specifies whether the printer is capable of overriding Job attributes embedded in the Job document(s) with IPP Job attributes, and with what level of reliability: "attempted" [RFC2911]; "not-attempted" [RFC2911]; or "guaranteed" [PWG5100.11].


Given these descriptions, a Client SHOULD comply with the following guidelines:

Do not always specify "ipp-attribute-fidelity" = 'true' because this can have unintended side effects, such as output scaling, etc.

If available prefer "job-mandatory-attributes" over "ipp-attribute-fidelity"

Regard "pdl-override-supported" = 'attempted' as functionally equivalent to "pdl-override-supported" = 'not-attempted', since neither guarantee overrides.

Don't expect 'guaranteed' to be available, especially for complex PDLs, since it is impractical to implement with all but the simplest document formats.

Don't expect 'guaranteed' to be 100% trustworthy with complex PDLs, since implementing that guarantee would be impractical to implement.

Provide document data that is the correct size, etc. to avoid overrides and not depend on the IPP Printer to perform these overrides unless it can guarantee it.


A Printer SHOULD comply with the following guidelines regarding how to support "ipp-attribute-fidelity", "job-mandatory-attributes", and "pdl-override-supported":

The Printer SHOULD support "job-mandatory-attributes"

The Printer SHOULD support 'guaranteed' for "pdl-override-supported" for JPEG and PWG Raster document formats.


181182

103310341035103610371038

103910401041

1042104310441045

1046

1047

10481049

1050

10511052

10531054

10551056

10571058

1059

10601061

1062

10631064

183


5.6 Prefer "multiple-document-handling" For Copies Collation

Although there was a time where specifying multiple copies of a Job would by default produce an un-collated collection of copies, when a User asks for multiple copies the User's expectation is almost always that the Job will produce a collated collection of copies. Despite this User expectation, for historical reasons the print systems have assumed un-collated to be the norm.

The "sheet-collate" attribute [RFC3381] "specifies whether or not the media sheets of each copy of each printed document in a Job are to be in sequence, when multiple copies of the document are specified by the ’copies’ attribute". The IPP Client likely doesn't want to collate sheets, but rather collate copies of the Job. The "multiple-document-handling" Job Template attribute provides these semantics. Although "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics" [RFC2911] §4.2.4 asserts that the "multiple-document-handling" attribute is relevant only if a Job consists of two or more documents, this attribute provides the desired semantics outside that context as well.

"IPP: Job and Printer Extensions – Set 3 (JPS3)" [PWG5100.13] §10 provides a detailed discussion of the relationship between Impressions, Pages and Sheets, and attributes that influence how the various Job Template attributes affect these metrics.


A Client SHOULD request collation for multiple copies of a Job using the "multiple-document-handling" attribute with its value set to "separate-documents-collated-copies" if the Printer supports the "multiple-document-handling" attribute.


A Printer SHOULD implement "multiple-document-handling" to allow a Client to request collated copies of a Job.

5.7 Specify "orientation-requested" For Supported Document Types

A Client uses the "orientation-requested" attribute [RFC2911] §4.2.10 to convey the desired orientation of the pages for a Job or Document in a Job. Although some document type formats provide a mechanism to express page orientation, others do not.


If "orientation-requested-supported" is in the filtered list of Job Template attributes for the chosen document format, a Client SHOULD provide the "orientation-requested" attribute with the Job or with each Document submitted to an IPP Job.


184185

1065

10661067106810691070

107110721073107410751076107710781079

108010811082

1083

108410851086

1087

10881089

1090

1091109210931094

1095

109610971098

186



A Printer SHOULD implement "orientation-requested" for the PDLs it supports that lack a mechanism to specify page orientation.

5.8 Evaluating Printer Capability Attributes

Before creating a Job, a Client SHOULD query the IPP Printer to evaluate its capabilities. Techniques for doing this using different sequences of operations are described in §4.3. When responding to an IPP Get-Printer-Attributes request, the Printer filters the set of attributes and values [RFC2911] to those that are acceptable to a Job Creation, Validate-Job, and Validate- Document operation.

IPP Client implementations SHOULD evaluate the attributes listed in Table 1, which lists the Printer attributes that are discussed in the following subsections.

Table 1: Printer Capability Attributes A Client Should Evaluate

Attribute Name Reference

Description

document-format-supported

RFC 2911 Lists the set of supported document formats

printer-get-attributes-supported

PWG 5100.13

Lists the set of attributes a Client can send to the Printer in a Get-Printer-Attributes operation request that the Printer can employ to filter the set of Job Template attributes it sends back in its response

document-format-varying-attributes

RFC 3380 Lists the attributes whose defaults or range of supported values vary by document format

ipp-features-supported PWG 5100.13

Lists the set of optional functionality the printer supports

printer-config-change-date-time

PWG 5100.13

Helps a Client or operator to determine how recently any of the Printer description attributes has been changed; useful if the Client is caching printer defaults and capabilities

printer-config-change-time

PWG 5100.13

Helps a Client or operator to determine how recently any of the Printer description


187188

1099

11001101

1102

11031104110511061107

11081109

1110

189


attributes has been changed; useful if the Client is caching printer defaults and capabilities

job-creation-attributes-supported

PWG 5100.11

Lists the keyword names of the Job Template and operation attributes that the Printer will accept in Job Creation operations or a Validate-Job operation

document-creation-attributes-supported

PWG 5100.5

Lists the keyword names of the Document Template and operation attributes that the Printer will accept in Document Creation operations (Send-Document, Send-URI) or a Validate-Document operation

IPP Client implementations SHOULD NOT evaluate the attributes listed in Table 2.

Table 2: Printer Capability Attributes A Client Should AVOID

Attribute Name Reference Description

??? ??? ???

??? ??? ???

5.8.1 document-format-supported / document-format

One of the most elemental tasks that a Client performs is choosing a print Job document format. The Printer's "document-format-supported" attribute enumerates the document formats supported by the Printer. How the Client chooses the particular document format is beyond the scope of this specification.

Once the Client has chosen a format, it SHOULD send a second Get-Printer-Attributes operation request, including the "document-format" attribute. As is described in §4.4, the Client does this to receive the list of Printer and Job Template attributes filtered to correspond to that specific document format. In this way, the Client can get a set of Printer capabilities the accurately describe the possible options supported by the Printer for that document format, with unsupported attributes and values filtered out [RFC2911]. Further filtering can be done using attributes listed in the Printer's "printer-get-attributes-supported" attribute, described in §5.8.2.


190191

1111

1112

1113

1114

1115111611171118

11191120112111221123112411251126

192


5.8.2 printer-get-attributes-supported

The "printer-get-attributes-supported" attribute [PWG5100.13] enumerates those attributes that can be included in a Get-Printer-Attributes request to influence the attributes and attribute values sent by the Printer in its Get-Printer-Attributes operation response. This attribute is useful to a Client because it allows it to further filter the Printer's capabilities so that the options provided to a user can be more tightly constrained. Ideally a user will be presented as many options as are supported but no more.

If a Printer supports the "printer-get-attributes-supported" attribute, a Client SHOULD include only attributes whose names are listed in that attribute when performing follow-up Get-Printer-Attributes operations as described in §4.4; otherwise, the Printer might reject the operation or the operation response might contain unfiltered information, which the Client would likely not expect.

5.8.3 document-format-varying-attributes

The "document-format-varying-attributes" attribute [RFC3380] is a Printer attribute that lists the Printer attributes that might vary depending on the document format. While this attribute was designed for use by a management Client engaged in manipulating the state of the Printer via Set-Printer-Attributes operations, a Client can use it in the process of submitting a Job to identify those attributes that could have different values depending on the document format.

This attribute is useful to a Client because it provides another mechanism to detect attributes or attribute value ranges that could vary depending on the document format.

5.8.4 ipp-features-supported

The "ipp-features-supported" Printer attribute [PWG5100.13] provides a mechanism for listing support for a particular IPP extension feature. A feature can be comprised of multiple attributes, can also include new operations, and can have associated semantics defined as well. Examples of these features from [PWG5100.13] include "document-object", "job-save", "page-overrides", "proof-print", and "subscription-object". Other IPP specifications can define their own keywords and associated meanings, which are context-specific. It can be difficult to switch a feature on based solely on the existence of a particular set of attributes or attribute values.

This attribute is useful because it provides a way for a Client to easily enable potentially complex feature support without having to rely on more complicated heuristic analysis and interpolation of the attributes that are used to support the feature.


193194

1127

1128112911301131113211331134

11351136113711381139

1140

114111421143114411451146

11471148

1149

11501151115211531154115511561157

115811591160

195


5.8.5 printer-config-change-date-time and printer-config-change-time

The "printer-config-change-date-time" and "printer-config-change-time" Printer attributes [PWG5100.13] provide 2 different representations of the most recent time at which the printer-config-changed Printer Event occurred.

This attribute is useful because a Client that records and subsequently monitors this attribute will be able to decide whether it needs to re-evaluate the printer's attributes or whether a cached set of values can be used.

5.8.6 xxx-supported and xxx-default

"Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics" [RFC2911] §4.2 provides a set of rules for specifying how a Job Template attribute is defined. Generally a Job Template attribute is defined in a cluster of 3, including the attribute itself ("xxx"), an attribute that conveys the range of possible values that "xxx" can contain ("xxx-supported"), and an attribute that conveys the current default value ("xxx-default") that the Printer will use if that attribute isn't provided by the Client at Job submission time.

The "xxx-supported" and "xxx-default" attributes are reported to the Client using a Get-Printer-Attributes operation. These values can change if the Client includes attributes with the Get-Printer-Attributes operation such as "document-format" as discussed in §5.8.1 or one of the attributes enumerated by the "printer-get-attributes-supported" attribute as discussed in §5.8.2.

A Client SHOULD always provide all intended and applicable Job Template attributes explicitly in its operation requests; a Client SHOULD NOT depend on default values, because the default can change before the Job is processed.

5.8.7 xxx-supported vs. xxx-ready

Most Job Template attributes are defined using a cluster of 3 attributes ("xxx", "xxx-supported" and "xxx-default", as discussed in §5.8.6. Some attributes also have a fourth "xxx-ready" attribute in their cluster. This attribute is used to indicate which of the values in the "xxx-supported" attribute are ready for use with no user interaction needed. The attributes that have an associated "xxx-ready" attribute are generally those that involve consumables such as paper or marking agents. A common example would be the "media-ready" attribute [RFC2911], which indicates the set of media that is physically in the paper trays. This would likely differ from "media-supported" because the set of supported media types is most likely larger than the set of media types currently installed in the paper trays.

This attribute is useful to a Client because it allows the Client to be able to determine whether certain consumables choices are already available for use, and allows the Client to make certain choices as to the workflow it provides to the user.


196197

1161

116211631164

116511661167

1168

116911701171117211731174

11751176117711781179

118011811182

1183

1184118511861187118811891190119111921193

119411951196

198


5.8.8 job-creation-attributes-supported

The "job-creation-attributes-supported" attribute [PWG5100.11] lists the set of Job attributes that can be set by a Client with a Job Creation operation (Create-Job, Print-Job, Print-URI) or a Validate-Job operation. The list of attributes is not limited to Job Template attributes; the list can also include optional Job submission attributes, such as "job-name".

The Client can use this attribute to know which attributes the Printer supports.

5.8.9 document-creation-attributes-supported

The "document-creation-attributes-supported" attribute [PWG5100.5] is similar to the "job-creation-attributes-supported" attribute except it applies to those attributes that can be supplied in Document Creation (Print- Job, Print-URI, Send-Document, and Send-URI) and manipulation (Set-Document-Attributes, Set-Job-Attributes) operations. All recommendations made for the use of "job-creation-attributes-supported" also apply to "document-creation-attributes-supported".

5.8.10 job-settable-attributes-supported

The "job-settable-attributes-supported" attribute [RFC3380] lists the Job object attributes that can have their values changed via a Set-Job-Attributes operation. This is useful to the Client because it provides a mechanism to control some aspects of job state, which can affect processing time and execution. For instance, a Client can use this attribute to update Job attributes and release a job in the pending-held state after all documents have been submitted.

5.8.11 media-col-ready vs. media-col-database

The “media-col-database” attribute describes all the pre-defined "media-col" values implemented by the Printer, regardless of whether they are currently available. By definition, this attribute is not sent by the Printer unless explicitly requested since it is large, expensive to generate, and likely contains media that are not readily available, which can be misleading to the user. The “media-col-ready” attribute [PWG5100.3] describes the attributes of the media that is currently ready to use.

The Printer SHOULD implement the “media-col-ready” attribute.

The Client SHOULD use “media-col-ready” if the Printer implements it. The Client SHOULD NOT retrieve the “media-col-database” attribute unless the User does something overt that depends on presenting or using the entire "media-col-database".

5.9 Resolving Job Attribute Conflicts and Constraints

The "job-constraints-supported" and "job-resolvers-supported" attributes [PWG5100.13] provide respectively mechanisms for a Printer to describe to a Client the constraints


199200

1197

11981199120012011202

1203

1204

120512061207120812091210

1211

121212131214121512161217

1218

121912201221122212231224

1225

122612271228

1229

12301231

201


between sets of attributes and/or attribute values, and associated formulae for resolving constraint conflicts. A Client that supports these attributes properly can resolve conflicts between constrained attributes or attribute values locally, without having to contact the Printer with requests to validate the attribute set correctness. The "preferred-attributes" attribute provides an additional mechanism for a Printer to report attribute conflicts detected during a "Validate-Job" operation. This is covered in more detail in § 4.5.

The “job-constraints-supported” attribute definition in [PWG5100.13] §5.6.8 provides this example:

For example, a constraint for duplex printing on transparency media would be encoded as a collection containing “resolver-name”, “sides”, and “media-col” member attributes. The “sides” member attribute would have two values - “two-sided-long-edge” and “two-sided- short-edge” - while the “media-col” member attribute would have a single "media-type" member attribute with the value “transparency”.

The “job-resolvers-supported” attribute definition in [PWG5100.13] §5.6.11 provides this example:

For example, a resolver for duplex printing on transparency media would be encoded as a collection containing “resolver-name”, “sides”, and “media-col” member attributes. The “sides” member attribute would have the value “one-sided” while the “media-col” member attribute would contain a "media-type" member attribute with the value “stationery”.

To illustrate how this works via 2 examples, the Client is assumed to have received the following attributes from the Printer in a Get-Printer-Attributes operation response. The attributes relevant to these examples are listed below, using the Open Standard Print API [PAPI] attribute list text representation syntax:

sides-default="one-sided"media-col-ready={ { media-size = { x-dimension=21590 y-dimension=27940 } media-top-margin=423 media-bottom-margin=423 media-left-margin=423 media-right-margin=423 media-source=tray-3 media-type="stationery" media-source-properties=


202203

1232123312341235123612371238

12391240

12411242124312441245

12461247

12481249125012511252

1253125412551256

1257125812591260126112621263126412651266126712681269127012711272

204


{ media-source-feed-direction="long-edge-first" media-source-feed-orientation=4 } } { media-size= { x-dimension=27940 y-dimension=43180 } media-top-margin=423 media-bottom-margin=423 media-left-margin=423 media-right-margin=423 media-source="tray-2" media-type="transparency" media-source-properties= { media-source-feed-direction="short-edge-first" media-source-feed-orientation=3 } }}

job-constraints-supported={ resolver-name=“A” sides= { "two-sided-long-edge" "two-sided-short-edge" } media-col= { media-type="transparency" }}

job-resolvers-supported={ resolver-name=“A” sides="one-sided" media-col= { media-type="stationery"


205206

1273127412751276127712781279128012811282128312841285128612871288128912901291129212931294129512961297129812991300130113021303130413051306130713081309131013111312131313141315131613171318

207


}}

To illustrate how constraints and resolvers work using the above attribute information, two examples will be described. In each of them, the Client loads the attributes from the Printer and presents a print dialog with print options to the User. The state of "sides" is initialized with the value from "sides-default", and “media-col" is initialized with the value from "media-col-default".

As a first example, the User chooses "sides" = 'two-sided-long-edge'. The Client detects a control change, and evaluates the changed value against the constraints. The Client detects no conflicts, so the Client accepts the attribute value change. Then the User selects "transparency" for a media type. The Client detects a control change and evaluates the changed value against the constraints. The Client detects a conflict, so the Client takes some action to resolve the conflict. The Client implementation determines how the conflict is resolved. It could be that the new value is rejected ("media-col" change in this example), or it could be that the new value is kept but the conflicting attribute is changed as per the resolver. Or the choices could be presented to the User in some way.

For a second example, the User selects "transparency" for a media type. The Client detects a control change and evaluates the changed value against the constraints. The Client detects no conflicts, so the Client accepts the attribute value change. Then the User selects "sides"='two-sided-short-edge'. The Client detects a control change and evaluates the changed value against the constraints. The Client detects a conflict, so the Client takes some action to resolve the conflict. Again, how the Client manages the resolution is at the discretion of the Client implementors.

5.10 IPP Object Status Attributes

A Client will evaluate different sets of attributes when following the procedures in §4.7 or 4.10 to monitor the status of a Printer or Job. These sets should be interpreted in the context of one another to ensure correct status evaluation.

5.10.1 Printer Status

A Printer conveys its status using the "printer-state", "printer-state-reasons" and "printer-state-message" attributes [RFC2911], as well as the "printer-alert" and "printer-alert-description" [PWG5100.9]. A Client can acquire these attributes using a Get-Printer-Attributes operation. A Printer SHOULD append to its "printer-state-reasons" attribute values the appropriate suffixes defined in [RFC2911] §4.4.12.

If the Printer and Client both support IPP Notifications, the Client can create a Printer subscription that includes the "printer-state", "printer-state-reasons" and "printer-state-message" attributes in the "notify-attributes" list. See §5.11 for more information on IPP Notifications.


208209

13191320

13211322132313241325

1326132713281329133013311332133313341335

1336133713381339134013411342

1343

134413451346

1347

13481349135013511352

1353135413551356

210


5.10.2 Job Status

A Job conveys its status using the "job-state", "job-state-reasons" and "job-state-message" attributes. A Client can acquire these attributes using a Get-Job-Attributes operation.

If the Printer and Client both support IPP Notifications, the Client can create a Job subscription that includes the "job-state", "job-state-reasons" and "job-state-message" attributes in the "notify-attributes" list. See §5.11 for more information on IPP Notifications.

5.10.3 Document Status

If the Client wants detailed information about the status of Document objects within a Job, it can get the status of the various Documents within the Job using the Get-Document-Attributes operation, and would examine the "document-state", "document-state-reasons" and "document-state-message" attributes.

5.11 IPP Notifications Attributes

A well-implemented IPP Printer SHOULD support IPP Notifications [RFC3995]. The Printer SHOULD include additional Printer attributes in Printer event notifications (e.g. "printer-supply" for supply events, "printer-input-tray" for media events, etc.).

When subscribing for IPP notifications, a Client SHOULD include the "notify-attributes" Subscription Template attribute in its Job Creation operations rather than subscribing to events using the separate Create-Job-Subscriptions or Create-Printer-Subscriptions operations. Having the Job Creation operation create the subscription makes the subscription creation and Job creation operations atomic and reduces the need for additional operations.

A Client uses the "notify-attributes" attribute to list the attributes it wants request that each notification include particular attributes. If each notification includes the attributes the Client needs, the Client will not need to perform a subsequent Get-Printer-Attributes operation for a Printer subscription, or Get-Job-Attributes operation for a Job subscription.

6. IPP Document Page OrderDocument formats intended for streaming (printed directly), such as PWG Raster, need to have the pages sent in the order that they should emerge from the printer. This order will be affected in part by which side the marking appears on when the page emerges from the printer. On a printer that implements the "printer-output-tray" attribute and prints its documents “face down” (the paper emerges with the marking on the bottom side of the page), the pages should be sent in the order 1-N. On a printer that prints its pages “face up” (the paper emerges with the marking on the top side of


211212

1357

135813591360

1361136213631364

1365

1366136713681369

1370

137113721373

137413751376137713781379

13801381138213831384

1385

1386138713881389139013911392

213


the page), the pages should be sent in the reverse order (N-1). Other aspects, including duplex and page reordering, will further affect this page ordering. If the Printer does not support the "printer-output-tray" attribute, the "output-bin" and "output-bin-default" attributes can be evaluated. The 'face-up' value indicates last-to-first order; all other values are first-to-last.

Other document formats that are not intended for streaming but are rather intended for more general use, such as PDF or word processing document formats, need to be sent as-is, with no page reordering. It will be the Printer’s responsibility to paginate and print the file in the order that is appropriate given the paper orientation and other built-in information in the document format (with overriding behavior as per §5.5). This may require the entire Document to be received before the first page can be printed. For instance, if a Client submits a Job with its document content in PDF document format, the Client SHOULD send the document format in 1-N page ordering, and depend on the printer processing the pages in whatever order is appropriate to comply with the preferences in the Job IPP attributes and the settings in the PDF document.

7. IPP Printer Best PracticesThis section enumerates practices that SHOULD be followed by implementers of IPP Printer objects, whether embedded in a Printer or in a separate Print Server.

7.1 IPP Objects and URI Resource Paths

IPP operations require a target consisting of a "printer-uri" attribute and zero or more operation identifiers, such as "job-id", "document-number", or others ([RFC2911] §3.1.5).

Each instance of a Printer, FaxOut, or Scan Service provided by an Imaging Device is identified by a URI. The URI scheme MUST be "ipps" [RFC-IPPS] or "ipp" [RFC3510]. It MUST NOT be "http" or "https" [RFC2910].

The path component of an IPP Printer URI SHOULD be “/ipp/print” for the only (or default) instance of the service on an Imaging System and “/ipp/print/instance-name” for each additional, non-default instance on the Imaging System. IPP FaxOut [PWG5100.15] and IPP Scan [PWG5100.17] each define a well-known path for their respective Service Object types.

If the Printer supports IPP operations with the "/" resource path, then the Printer SHOULD support Get-Printer-Attributes and SHOULD NOT support Job Creation operations.

"Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics" [RFC2911] requires particular Client behavior concerning the use of URIs in an operation's "printer-uri" attribute. [RFC2911] section 2.4 requires the Client to only provide URIs that are listed by the Printer's "printer-uri-supported" attribute. [RFC2911] § 3.1.5 requires the Client to only


214215

13931394139513961397

1398139914001401140214031404140514061407

1408

14091410

1411

141214131414

141514161417

14181419142014211422

142314241425

1426142714281429

216


use absolute URIs for the value sent for the "printer-uri" operation attribute. Despite the recommendations in[RFC3196], a Printer SHOULD NOT accept a request where the "printer-uri" value is a relative URI and SHOULD NOT accept a request where the "printer-uri" doesn't match one of those URIs in the Printer's "printer-uri-supported" attribute.

A Printer SHOULD reject IPP operations where the value of the "printer-uri" operation attribute is a relative URI. A Client SHOULD NOT use a relative URI in the "printer-uri" operation attribute.

The "job-uri" path has never been fully specified. Printers SHOULD choose a path appropriate for the implementation. Clients SHOULD use the "printer-uri" and "job-id" attributes to target a Job object for a Job operation. Clients SHOULD NOT use the "job-uri" attribute to target a Job object.

7.2 Fax Destination URIs

When a Client submits a fax Job to an IPP FaxOut service [PWG5100.15], it includes a set of destination URIs. An IPP FaxOut Printer Object SHOULD handle the “fax:” URI scheme as being equivalent to the “tel” URI scheme [RFC3966].

7.3 Printer Resource URIs

URIs to various Printer resident resources SHOULD be Network Accessible even if all other network services have been disabled in the Output Device.

As an example, the "printer-icons" URI SHOULD be Network Accessible even if the Output Device has its embedded web server turned off. Since the "printer-icons" attribute is defined to contain a set of "http" or "https" URIs, each URI SHOULD include the port number of the IPP Server, e.g. "http://myprinter.mydomain.com:631/icon.png".

7.4 Error Reporting

A Printer SHOULD log errors using the PWG Common Log Format [PWG5110.3].

8. HTTP Protocol UseIPP currently uses HTTP/1.1 for its transport. IPP/2.0 and other IPP specifications have specified some of the facilities of HTTP that IPP clients and servers SHOULD support in order to provide the semantics that IPP needs to provide a great user experience. Even so, there are best practices that SHOULD be followed.

What follows includes recommendations for both Client and Server implementations. Each subsection will provide Client recommendations in an 8.x.1 subsection; Server recommendations will be listed in an 8.x.2 subsection.


217218

14301431143214331434

143514361437

1438143914401441

1442

144314441445

1446

14471448

1449145014511452

1453

1454

1455

1456145714581459

146014611462

219


8.1 New HTTP/1.1 Specifications

In June 2014 the IETF published the following specifications, which obsolete RFC 2616:

Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing [RFC7230]

Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content [RFC7231]

Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Conditional Requests [RFC7232]

Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Range Requests [RFC7233]

Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching [RFC7234]

Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Authentication [RFC7235]

8.1.1 HTTP Client

Implementors SHOULD review their HTTP stack implementation to ensure conformance with these current HTTP/1.1 specifications.

8.1.2 HTTP Server

Implementors SHOULD review their HTTP stack implementation to ensure conformance with these current HTTP/1.1 specifications.

8.2 HTTP/1.1 Expect Header

The HTTP/1.1 "Expect" header field [RFC7230] allows the HTTP Client to send the HTTP request header to the Server and pause to receive an HTTP response code before sending the request body, if present. This allows a Server to indicate via an appropriate response code if there are any authorization or encryption requirements to be satisfied before sending the HTTP request body.

8.2.1 HTTP Client

In its first request to the HTTP Server, and in all first uses of a particular IPP operation while involved in a session consisting of a sequence of IPP operations, the HTTP Client SHOULD include the "Expect: 100-continue" header in the request headers [RFC7231] §5.1.1. The HTTP Client SHOULD then wait at least 1 second for a response from the HTTP Server. If no response is received, the Client should record this for subsequent requests so that no further response delays are incurred, and then continue sending the message body; otherwise the HTTP Client SHOULD process the response in one of the following ways (which is a more detailed set of behaviors than described in HTTP/1.1 [RFC7230]):


220221

1463

14641465

1466

1467

1468

1469

1470

1471

1472

14731474

1475

14761477

1478

14791480148114821483

1484

148514861487148814891490149114921493

222


100 Continue: continue sending the message body

301 Moved Permanently / 302 Moved Temporarily:

a. If the request type is POST or PUT, fail and report an error, since redirection is generally unexpected for this request type

b. If the request type is HEAD or GET, redirect the request to the new URI or address the redirection in an implementation-defined way, e.g. request confirmation from the User, validate the redirected URI scheme and origin server, etc.

400 Bad Request: the Client should record the lack of an Expect header, and re-send the HTTP request without the Expect header. (An HTTP/1.1 Server is supposed to support the Expect header as per [RFC7230] §5.1.1 but a robust Client might include logic for recovering from interacting with poorly implemented servers.)

401 Unauthorized: close the connection, acquire new credentials from the User, and retry the HTTP request with the newly acquired credentials

403 Forbidden: abandon the connection and report an error as per §4.11.

417 Expectation Failed: resend the HTTP request without the Expect header

426 Upgrade Required: if the upgrade response header contains a TLS identifier, upgrade the connection to TLS [RFC2817] and then re-send the HTTP request

Any other HTTP status code: treat this as a fatal error and report it as per §4.11.

8.2.2 HTTP Server

The HTTP Server SHOULD accept and process the "Expect" header as defined in § 5.1.1 of "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content" [RFC7231].

8.3 "Host" Header Field

An HTTP Server validates the Host request header in order to protect against DNS rebinding attacks. Section 5.1.1 of "IPP Everywhere" [PWG5100.14] places additional requirements on the Host header.

8.3.1 HTTP Client

An HTTP Client SHOULD include the Host header field, and its value SHOULD match the name in the URI it is using.


223224

1494

1495

14961497

1498149915001501

1502150315041505

15061507

1508

1509

15101511

1512

1513

15141515

1516

151715181519

1520

15211522

225


8.3.2 HTTP Server

An HTTP Server SHOULD use the Host value in generated URIs, such as the embedded web server web pages or IPP operation responses.

8.4 If-Modified-Since, Last-Modified, and 304 Not Modified

The If-Modified-Since request header allows an HTTP Client to efficiently determine whether a particular resource that can be retrieved using a GET request (icon, ICC profile, localization file, etc.) has been updated since the last time the HTTP Client requested it.

8.4.1 HTTP Client

An HTTP Client should utilize the "If-Modified-Since" header in GET requests for resources that it may already have locally, and support the "Last-Modified" response header and "304 Not Modified" response code, to avoid re-fetching these resources if they haven't changed.

8.4.2 HTTP Server

HTTP Servers SHOULD support the "If-Modified-Since" request header [RFC7232], the Last-Modified response header [RFC7232], and the "304 Not Modified" response code [RFC7232].

8.5 Cache-Control

Most resource files provided by a Printer in a GET response will typically be cacheable. However, IPP responses in a POST response are not [PWG5100.14]. Most resources retrieved by an IPP Client from an IPP Printer via an HTTP GET are usually quite static and ought to be treated as a persistent resource. The HTTP "Cache-Control" header [RFC7234] formalizes this.

8.5.1 HTTP Client

An HTTP Client SHOULD conform to the HTTP/1.1 caching semantics [RFC7234]. An HTTP Client SHOULD support the "Cache-Control" response header.

8.5.2 HTTP Server

An HTTP Server SHOULD conform to the HTTP/1.1 caching semantics [RFC7234]. A Printer's HTTP Server MAY provide a "Cache-Control" header in each HTTP GET response, with an appropriate "max-age" value for that resource. A Printer's HTTP Server SHOULD provide a Cache-Control header in IPP POST responses with the value "no-cache".


226227

1523

15241525

1526

1527152815291530

1531

1532153315341535

1536

153715381539

1540

15411542154315441545

1546

15471548

1549

15501551155215531554

228


9. Important Implementation Options

9.1 Job Receipts: The "xxx-actual" Attributes

The "xxx-actual" [PWG5100.8] attributes cannot be used to detect substitutions during. The state of these attributes is not guaranteed to be set until the Job reaches a terminating state ('aborted', 'canceled' or 'completed'). Processors of the Job receipt SHOULD NOT expect the Printer to bind values to the "xxx-actual" attributes before the job has reached a terminated state.

9.2 Printer Constraints: The "preferred-attributes" Attribute

The Printer indicates it supports the "preferred-attributes" attribute [PWG5100.13] with the "preferred-attributes-supported" Printer Description attribute. If supported, the Printer will send the "preferred-attributes" attribute in Validate-Job operation responses if it will perform substitutions the Printer to resolve constraints problems it detected. This gives the Client the opportunity to resolve these issues locally. However, although this is useful when performing Job "pre-flight", a Client should not be implemented to use this as a mechanism to be called with high frequency for resolving constraints conflicts in an interactive UI. As outlined in §4.5, a Client SHOULD start by using the procedures described in §5.9, which can be performed locally on the Client and doesn't require any network utilization.

10. Conformance Recommendations

10.1 Client Conformance Recommendations

Clients SHOULD implement the following:

1. all of the "best" options in section 4;

2. all of the recommendations in section 5;


4. all of the Client recommendations in section 8;

5. all of the Client recommendations in section 11;

6. all of the Client recommendations in section 12

10.2 Printer Conformance Recommendations

Printers SHOULD implement the following:


229230

1555

1556

15571558155915601561

1562

1563156415651566156715681569157015711572

1573

1574

1575

1576

1577

1578

1579

1580

1581

1582

1583

231


1. all of the "best" options provided in section 4;



4. all of the Printer recommendations in section 8;

5. all of the Printer recommendations in section 11;

6. all of the Printer recommendations in section 12

11. Internationalization ConsiderationsFor interoperability and basic support for multiple languages, conforming implementations MUST support:

1. The Universal Character Set (UCS) Transformation Format -- 8 bit (UTF-8) [STD63] encoding of Unicode [UNICODE] [ISO10646]; and

2. The Unicode Format for Network Interchange [RFC5198] that requires transmission of well-formed UTF-8 strings and recommends transmission of normalized UTF-8 strings in Normalization Form C (NFC) [UAX15].

Unicode NFC is defined as the result of performing Canonical Decomposition (into base characters and combining marks) followed by Canonical Composition (into canonical composed characters wherever Unicode has assigned them).

WARNING – Performing normalization on UTF-8 strings received from IPP Clients and subsequently storing the results (e.g., in IPP Job objects) could cause false negatives in IPP Client searches and failed access (e.g., to IPP Printers with percent-encoded UTF-8 URIs now 'hidden').

11.1 Client Considerations

A Client SHOULD query and use localization catalogs provided by the IPP Printer [PWG5100.13], if available.

11.2 Server Considerations

A Printer SHOULD support localization catalogs [PWG5100.13].


232233

1584

1585

1586

1587

1588

1589

1590

15911592

15931594159515961597

159815991600

1601160216031604

1605

16061607

1608

1609

234


12. Security Considerations

12.1 Client Security Considerations

In addition to the sections below, Client implementors should also pay attention to §7.3, §8.2.1 and §8.3.

12.1.1 HTTP/1.1 Expect Header

As discussed in §8.2, a Client SHOULD send the HTTP/1.1 Expect header where it is important to determine if the Printer will request to upgrade the connection to use TLS if it isn't being used already. Examples of this scenario include:

a. First HTTP request for a connectionb. First IPP request for a connectionc. Any request where the Client will be transmitting potentially sensitive data

12.1.2 HTTP Upgrade

A Client or Server MAY be implemented to refuse to use certain operations if a connection is not employing TLS encryption. Encryption can be supplied via HTTP Upgrade [RFC2817] or HTTPS [RFC 2818]. Clients and Servers SHOULD support TLS encryption via HTTP Upgrade [RFC2817] and/or HTTP Over TLS (HTTPS) [RFC2818].

12.1.3 Using The Validate-Job Operation

A Client SHOULD use the Validate-Job IPP operation and the behavior recommendations enumerated in §8.2.1 to test whether the Printer requires authentication or encryption for Job submission.

12.1.4 Preferring The "ipps" URI Scheme

A Client SHOULD support the “ipps” URI scheme [RFC-IPPS]. A Client SHOULD prefer the “ipps” URI variant when available. A Client probing a Printer for the first time (§4.1.2 and §4.2) SHOULD first try using IPP over HTTPS, and if the connection fails then try IPP over HTTP.

12.2 Server Security Considerations

In addition to the sections below, Client implementors should also pay attention to §7.3, §8.2.1 and §8.3.


235236

1610

1611

16121613

1614

161516161617

161816191620

1621

16221623162416251626

1627

162816291630

1631

1632163316341635

1636

16371638

237


12.2.1 HTTP/1.1 Expect Header

As discussed in §8.2, a Server MUST support the HTTP/1.1 Expect header and respond appropriately [RFC7230].

12.2.2 HTTP Upgrade

A Server SHOULD support HTTP Upgrade [RFC2817] to indicate to a Client the need to upgrade the connection to TLS.

12.2.3 Support For The "ipps" URI Scheme

A Printer SHOULD support the "ipps" URI scheme [RFC-IPPS].

If a Printer is configured to only support IPPS (or IPP over HTTPS), and a Client sends an IPP over HTTP request, the Printer MAY do one of the following:

a. Close the connection;

b. Return 301 Moved Permanently;

c. Return 400 Bad Request;

d. Return 426 Upgrade Required to upgrade the connection to TLS

There is no IPP response, just a HTTP response. HTTP requests for embedded web server or resources can be handled in the same way.

12.2.4 DNS Rebinding

Printers SHOULD validate the HTTP Host request header in order to protect against DNS rebinding attacks [PWG5100.14]. The Host header is discussed in §8.3.

13. References

13.1 Informative References

[IANAIPP] Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Registries, "Internet Printing Protocol", http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipp-registrations/

[ISO10646] "Information technology -- Universal Coded Character Set (UCS)", ISO/IEC 10646:2011

[PAPI] A. Hlava, N. Jacobs, M. Sweet, "Open Standard Print API (PAPI)", July 2005, http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/openprinting/PAPI-specification.pdf?download


238239

1639

16401641

1642

16431644

1645

1646

16471648

1649

1650

1651

1652

16531654

1655

16561657

1658

1659

16601661

16621663

166416651666

240

http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/openprinting/PAPI-specification.pdf?download

http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/openprinting/PAPI-specification.pdf?download

http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipp-registrations/


[PWG5100.1] M. Sweet, "IPP Finishings 2.0", PWG 5100.1-2014, December 2014, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippfinishings20-20141219-5100.1.pdf

[PWG5100.3] K. Ocke, T. Hastings, "Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): Production Printing Attributes – Set1", PWG 5100.3-2001, February 2001, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippprodprint10-20010212-5100.3.pdf

[PWG5100.5] D. Carney, T. Hastings, P. Zehler. “Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): Document Object”, PWG 5100.5-2003, October 2003, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippdocobject10-20031031-5100.5.pdf

[PWG5100.7] T. Hastings, P. Zehler, "Standard for The Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): Job Extensions", PWG 5100.7-2003, October 2003, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippjobext10-20031031-5100.7.pdf

[PWG5100.8] D. Carney, H. Lewis, "Internet Printing Protocol: '-actual' Attributes", PWG 5100.8-2003, March 2003, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippactuals10-20030313-5100.8.pdf

[PWG5100.9] I. McDonald, C. Whittle, "Internet Printing Protocol (IPP) Printer State Extensions v1.0", PWG 5100.9-2009, July 2009, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippstate10-20090731-5100.9.pdf

[PWG5100.11] T. Hastings, D. Fullman, “IPP: Job and Printer Operations – Set 2”, PWG 5100.11-2010, October 2010, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippjobprinterext10-20101030-5100.11.pdf

[PWG5100.12] R. Bergman, H. Lewis, I. McDonald, M. Sweet, "IPP/2.0 Second Edition", PWG 5100.12-2011, February 2011, ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ipp20-20110214-5100.12.pdf

[PWG5100.13] M. Sweet, I. McDonald, P. Zehler, "IPP: Job and Printer Extensions – Set 3 (JPS3)", 5100.13-2012, July 2012, ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippjobprinterext3v10-20120727-5100.13.pdf

[PWG5100.14] M. Sweet, I. McDonald, A. Mitchell, J. Hutchings, "IPP Everywhere", 5100.14-2013, January 2013, ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippeve10-20130128-5100.14.pdf


241242

166716681669

1670167116721673

1674167516761677

1678167916801681

1682168316841685

1686168716881689

1690169116921693

169416951696

1697169816991700

170117021703

243

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippeve10-20130128-5100.14.pdf

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippeve10-20130128-5100.14.pdf

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippjobprinterext3v10-20120727-5100.13.pdf

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippjobprinterext3v10-20120727-5100.13.pdf

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ipp20-20110214-5100.12.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippjobprinterext10-20101030-5100.11.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippjobprinterext10-20101030-5100.11.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippstate10-20090731-5100.9.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippstate10-20090731-5100.9.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippactuals10-20030313-5100.8.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippactuals10-20030313-5100.8.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippjobext10-20031031-5100.7.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippjobext10-20031031-5100.7.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippdocobject10-20031031-5100.5.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippdocobject10-20031031-5100.5.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippprodprint10-20010212-5100.3.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippprodprint10-20010212-5100.3.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippfinishings20-20141219-5100.1.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippfinishings20-20141219-5100.1.pdf


[PWG5100.15] M. Sweet, "IPP FaxOut Service", PWG 5100.15-2013, November 2013, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippfaxout10- 20131115-5100.15.pdf

[PWG5100.16] M. Sweet, “IPP Transaction-Based Printing Extensions”, PWG 5100.16-2013, November 2013, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ipptrans10-20131108-5100.16.pdf

[PWG5100.17] P. Zehler, M. Sweet, "IPP Scan Service (SCAN)", 5100.17-2014, September 2014, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippscan10-20140918-5100.17.pdf

[PWG5110.3] M. Sweet, "PWG Common Log Format", PWG 5110.3-2013, April, 2013, http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ids-log10-20130401.5110.3.pdf

[RFC2119] S. Bradner, “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels”, RFC 2119, March 1997, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt

[RFC2817] R. Khare, S Lawrence, "Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1", RFC 2817, September 2000, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2817.txt

[RFC2818] E. Rescorla, “HTTP Over TLS”, RFC 2818, May 2000, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2818.txt

[RFC2910] R. Herriot, S. Butler, P. Moore, R. Tuner, J. Wenn, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Encoding and Transport", RFC 2910, September 2000, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2910.txt

[RFC2911] R. deBry, T. Hastings, R. Herriot, S. Isaacson, P. Powell, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics", RFC 2911, September 2000, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2911.txt

[RFC3196] T. Hastings, C. Manros, P. Zehler, C. Kugler, H. Holst, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Implementer's Guide", RFC 3196, November 2001, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3196.txt

[RFC3380] T. Hastings, R. Herriot, C. Kugler, H. Lewis, "Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): Job and Printer Set Operations", RFC 3380, September 2002, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3381.txt

[RFC3381] T. Hastings, H. Lewis, R. Bergman, "Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): Job Progress Attributes", RFC 3381, September 2002, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3381.txt

[RFC3510] R. Herriot, I. McDonald, "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1 IPP URL Scheme", RFC 3510, April 2003, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3510.txt


244245

170417051706

1707170817091710

171117121713

171417151716

17171718

17191720

17211722

172317241725

172617271728

172917301731

173217331734

173517361737

17381739

246

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3510.txt









http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ids-log10-20130401.5110.3.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ids-log10-20130401.5110.3.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippscan10-20140918-5100.17.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippscan10-20140918-5100.17.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ipptrans10-20131108-5100.16.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ipptrans10-20131108-5100.16.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippfaxout10-%2020131115-5100.15.pdf

http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/candidates/cs-ippfaxout10-%2020131115-5100.15.pdf


[RFC3805] R. Bergman, H. Lewis, I. McDonald, "Printer MIB v2", RFC 3805, June 2004, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3805.txt

[RFC3806] R. Bergman, H. Lewis, I. McDonald, "Printer Finishing MIB", RFC 3806, June 2004, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3806.txt

[RFC3966] H. Schulzrinne, "The tel URI for Telephone Numbers", RFC 3966, December 2004, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3966.txt

[RFC3995] R. Herriot, T. Hastings, "Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): Event Notifications and Subscriptions", RFC 3995, March 2005, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3995.txt

[RFC3996] R. Herriot, T. Hastings, H. Lewis, "Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): The ’ippget’ Delivery Method for Event Notifications", RFC 3996, March 2005, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3996.txt

[RFC3997] R. Herriot, T. Hastings, "Internet Printing Protocol (IPP): Requirements for IPP Notifications", RFC 3997, March 2005, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3997.txt

[RFC6762] S. Cheshire, M. Krochmal, "Multicast DNS", RFC 6762, February 2013, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6762.txt

[RFC6763] S. Cheshire, M. Krochmal, "DNS-Based Service Discovery", RFC 6763, February 2013, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6763.txt

[RFC7230] R. Fielding, J. Reschke, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing", RFC 7230, June 2014, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc7230.txt

[RFC7231] R. Fielding, J. Reschke, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content", RFC 7231, June 2014, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc7231.txt

[RFC7232] R. Fielding, J. Reschke, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Conditional Requests", RFC 7232, June 2014, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc7232.txt

[RFC7233] R. Fielding, Y. Lafon, J. Reschke, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Range Requests", RFC 7233, June 2014, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc7233.txt

[RFC7234] R. Fielding, M. Nottingham, J. Reschke, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching", RFC 7234, June 2014, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc7234.txt


247248

17401741

17421743

17441745

174617471748

174917501751

175217531754

17551756

17571758

175917601761

176217631764

176517661767

176817691770

177117721773

249















[RFC7235] R. Fielding, J. Reschke, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Authentication", RFC 7235, June 2014, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc7235.txt

[RFC-IPPS] I. McDonald, M. Sweet, "IPP over HTTPS Transport Binding and 'ipps' URI Scheme", draft-mcdonald-ipps-uri-scheme-16.txt, November 2014, https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-mcdonald-ipps-uri-scheme-16.txt

[WSDiscovery-1.1] OASIS, "OASIS Web Services Dynamic Discovery (WS-Discovery) Version 1.1", July 2009, http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsdd/discovery/1.1/os/wsdd-discovery-1.1-spec-os.html

14. Annex A: HTTP/2.0There is an effort to create a new major revision to HTTP, which for now is being called HTTP/2.0. It brings a number of new facilities to HTTP, many of which could be very useful to IPP. The IEEE ISTO PWG IPP Working Group will produce a binding document for IPP over HTTP/2.0 when HTTP/2.0 is ratified and published. No formal binding for IPP over HTTP/2.0 is currently defined.

15. Authors' AddressesPrimary author:

Smith KennedyHewlett-Packard Co.11311 Chinden Blvd. MS 506Boise, ID [email protected]

The author would like to thank the following individuals for their contributions:

Ezra Brooks - Kentucky State Board of Recreation

16. Change History

16.1 February 5, 2013

Initial revision.


250251

177417751776

177717781779

178017811782

1783

1784

17851786178717881789

1790

1791

17921793179417951796

1797

17981799

1800

1801

1802

252

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-%20dd/discovery/1.1/os/wsdd-discovery-1.1-spec-os.html

http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-%20dd/discovery/1.1/os/wsdd-discovery-1.1-spec-os.html

https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-mcdonald-ipps-uri-scheme-16.txt



16.2 March 20, 2013

Resolved issues from feedback provided during the IPP conference call on February 25, 2013, as documented in teleconference meeting minutes and author's own notes.

1. Added Validate-Job operation as operation to be used during printer selection process to validate access by Client / user

2. Replaced previous Section 5 "Conformance Requirements" with new Section 5 "Attributes and Their Use in Operations"

3. Replaced previous Section 6 "Internationalization Considerations" with new Section 6 "HTTP Protocol Usage"

4. Added updated list of references

16.3 May 13, 2013

Resolved remaining issues from February 25, 2013 teleconference meeting notes and other feedback received since then.

1. Added PWG 5100.8, 5100.13 and WS-Discovery references; removed boilerplate [REFERENCE] reference entry; fixed references for 5100.14.

2. Updated with meeting notes fixes from April 8, including updated notation for comments (now in italic), revised notation for indicating iterative looping and parallel execution, and many other changes to section 4. Also changed document naming convention and moved URL where it is to be located on PWG FTP site.

16.4 July 19, 2013

Updated with feedback and discussions from the May 2013 F2F in Cupertino, and other piecemeal feedback.

1. Changed title to "IPP/2.0 Implementer's Guide

2. Changed Abstract to "Updates and extends RFC 3196 for IPP/2.0."

3. Renamed to follow the wd-ippig20-yyyymmdd.docx/pdf naming convention given the title change.

4. Made a PWG Working Draft, not a best practice

5. Added normative reference to RFC 3196.


253254

1803

18041805

18061807

18081809

18101811

1812

1813

18141815

18161817

1818181918201821

1822

18231824

1825

1826

18271828

1829

1830

255


16.5 September 22, 2013

Updated with feedback from reflector discussions and conference calls. This is a "new baseline", and much more work is needed to fill in TBD sections.

1. Substantially elaborated section 5.5.

2. Updated comments about using xxx-actual in detecting whether the printer uses the requested / recommended attribute values (more discussion needed)

3. Editorial changes (fixed "Implementors" to be "Implementer's", renamed some section titles

16.6 October 2, 2013

1. Changed the title to "IPP Implementor's Guide v2.0" (in part reverting change #3 from 2013-09-23) and the abstract to make it clear this applies to all IPP versions, not just IPP/2.0.

2. Expanded §5.8 to enumerate the attributes used in evaluating printer capabilities and how to properly use them or handle the cases where they are absent and assumed to be not supported. This is mostly a set of placeholders at this point.

3. Updated §5.6 to clarify guidance on "multiple-document-handling" vs. "sheet-collate".

4. Updated §4.2 to include a placeholder statement to make note that a Client should maintain a sense of user identity between 4.2 and 4.3 to ensure that the capabilities evaluated are really those that the user has access to use and more importantly that none are missing.

5. Comments in section 4.5 to catch all the places where using "xxx-actual" to recognize substitutions before the Job has been processed is suggested, because this seems to be a problematic suggestion.

16.7 January 3, 2014

Updated with review feedback from October 2013 face-to-face and December 16 conference call minutes notes. This is a "new baseline". More work is still needed to fill in TBD sections.

1. Addressed scenario where Create-Job created the Job but Send-Document fails (triggered by query from vendor: what to do when “document-format” is unsupported?)

2. Added new proposed operation for filtering features for a given user (JPS4?)


256257

1831

18321833

1834

18351836

18371838

1839

184018411842

184318441845

18461847

1848184918501851

185218531854

1855

185618571858

185918601861

1862

258


3. Moved discussion of xxx-actual use to its own section (currently section 11.1)

4. Expanded discussion of Send-URI / document-by-reference and recommended generally against it

5. Added new section 9 for covering IPP Notifications

6. Other changes not described in detail (consult -rev document for specifics).

16.8 January 24, 2014

Updated with review feedback from the 2014-01-13 conference call.

1. Refactored section 9 to other locations as per meeting review.

2. Moved section 10 content to section 6 and deleted section 10 as per meeting review.

3. Updated some portions of the “Security” section (what is in this revision labeled section 9) with references back to the HTTP section and also using notes and replies from the reflector.

16.9 April 10, 2014

Updated with review feedback from the February 2014 PWG Face-to-Face and many updates and document structure changes, to resolve all instances of "TBD" in the document. First Prototype draft.

1. Replaced all instances of TBD with their appropriate descriptions. This includes the examination of many attributes in section 5.

2. Rewrote several significant sections of section 4.

3. Added new section on document type considerations, discussing the proper use of “application/octet-stream”, and the difference between media types that are “streaming” and have historically been used as PDLs, as compared with other media types that are more structured.

4. Added conformance requirements but haven't filled it out with a detailed list yet.

5. Listed additional references to RFC 3380, 3995-3997.

6. Many other changes.


259260

1863

18641865

1866

1867

1868

1869

1870

18711872

187318741875

1876

187718781879

18801881

1882

1883188418851886

1887

1888

1889

261


16.10 May 13, 2014

Updated start of section 5.8 to include a table of the attributes to be discussed in the subsections of 5.8, right before the May 2014 Face-to-Face. No other significant changes.

16.11 August 14, 2014

Updated with review feedback from August 2014 PWG Face-to-Face meeting review of Section 7 and start of Section 8. Earlier sections include incomplete updates that should be disregarded by the reader.

16.12 November 13, 2014

Updated with review feedback from May 2014 PWG Face-to-Face and subsequent conference calls.

1. Replaced all instances of TBD with their appropriate descriptions. This includes the examination of many attributes in section 5.

2. Rewrote several significant sections of section 4. Contemplating a shift to UML sequence diagrams for section 4.

3. Added new section on document type considerations, discussing the proper use of “application/octet-stream”, and the difference between media types that are “streaming” and have historically been used as PDLs, as compared with other media types that are more structured.

4. Added conformance requirements but haven't filled it out with a detailed list yet.

5. Listed additional references to many RFCs and PWG specifications now referenced by this document

6. Reviewed all meeting minutes since May 2014 and made sure that all points were at least considered if not addressed. Open issues (whether new or dating from earlier) marked with comments for future discussion.

7. Additional IPPS interoperability considerations.

16.13 January 27, 2015

Updated with review feedback on wd-ig-20141113-rev.pdf in several conference calls.

1. Updated section 4 with UML sequence diagrams, generated using PlantUML and the sources added in the new Section 16, to replace the bulleted lists, which were becoming unwieldy.


262263

1890

189118921893

1894

189518961897

1898

18991900

19011902

19031904

1905190619071908

1909

19101911

191219131914

1915

1916

1917

191819191920

264


2. Resolved issues as per feedback from 2014-12-08 conference call meeting minutes

3. Resolved issues as per feedback from 2015-01-05 conference call meeting minutes

16.14 February 11, 2015

Updated following February 2015 F2F review - anticipating this revision will be WG last call.

1. Reviewed the rest of the document starting with §10

a. Re-ordered some of the later sections to more closely resemble the current template

b. Added reference to IANA PWG Registry

2. Resolved all "open question" comments

a. Merged two "BEST" options from §4.4

b. Updated §5.9 to call out the impracticality of implementing "pdl-override-supported" = 'guaranteed' for all but the simplest document formats

c. Decided that if IPPS is enabled but IPP is not then the Printer should use HTTP redirection and NOT mandate that the Printer implement any "basic set" of IPP

3. Resolved all feedback recorded in meeting minutes from February 4 review at the 2015 February PWG F2F (see ippv2-concall-minutes-20150105.pdf)

4. Added missing references, checked all references to be bookmarks, re-checked grammar and spelling


265266

1921

1922

1923

19241925

1926

19271928

1929

1930

1931

19321933

193419351936

19371938

19391940

1941

267